From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Corker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 17, 2009
67 A.D.3d 926 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 2007-11414.

November 17, 2009.

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the County Court, Rockland County (Alfieri, J.), imposed June 4, 2007, upon his conviction of assault in the first degree, upon a jury verdict.

Thomas P. Zugibe, District Attorney, New City, N.Y. (Itamar J. Yeger of counsel; Severyn Rebisz on the brief), for respondent.

Before: Dillon, J.P., Dickerson, Lott and Austin, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

The defendant's contentions that resentencing him approximately 7 years into his 12½-year term of imprisonment to add to his sentence the statutorily mandated period of post-release supervision ( see Penal Law § 70.45) violated his State and Federal constitutional rights to due process, to equal protection, and not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment, are unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v Rosario, 22 AD3d 871, 872; People v Travis, 213 AD2d 571; cf. People v Samms, 95 NY2d 52, 56), and we decline to reach those contentions in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

The period of postrelease supervision imposed on the resentence was not excessive ( see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).


Summaries of

People v. Corker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 17, 2009
67 A.D.3d 926 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

People v. Corker

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WYKEME CORKER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 17, 2009

Citations

67 A.D.3d 926 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 8633
888 N.Y.S.2d 418

Citing Cases

People v. Slakas

As to credit for time served following the initial sentencing, the terms of the resentences require that…

People v. Robinson

Moreover, even a valid waiver of the right to appeal does not preclude this Court from reviewing the…