From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Difo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 2, 1992
185 A.D.2d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

July 2, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.).


As the People concede, defendant should not have been resentenced without benefit of an updated pre-sentence report (CPL 390.20; People v. Washington, 172 A.D.2d 460).

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin and Asch, JJ.


Once again, we have a situation where it is contended that there should be an updated presentence report, the defendant having been continuously incarcerated.

The People commendably indicate that they are constrained, as I am, to follow the decision of this court that requires such report, even though only time in prison would be covered.

It must be reiterated that this is an unjustified burden placed on the criminal justice system (see, People v. Washington, 172 A.D.2d 460, 461 [Kupferman, J., dissenting]).


Summaries of

People v. Difo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 2, 1992
185 A.D.2d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Difo

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RAFAEL DIFO, Also…

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

Date published: Jul 2, 1992

Citations

185 A.D.2d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)