From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hoffman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 19, 1990
159 A.D.2d 638 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

March 19, 1990

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Orenstein, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by vacating the provision thereof which requires the defendant to make restitution in the amount of $1,082.44; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for a new determination of the amount of restitution required under Penal Law § 60.27.

We find, as the People concede, that the County Court improperly delegated to the Nassau County Probation Department the authority to determine the amount and manner of restitution (see, People v Fuller, 57 N.Y.2d 152; People v Bray, 150 A.D.2d 788; People v Bentivegna, 145 A.D.2d 899). The court failed to make any independent judicial finding as to the actual losses sustained by the victims, nor did it consider whether the defendant could afford to make restitution (see, People v Millar, 144 A.D.2d 1032; People v Bowden, 131 A.D.2d 581; People v White, 119 A.D.2d 708). Brown, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Hoffman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 19, 1990
159 A.D.2d 638 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Hoffman

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. SANDY HOFFMAN…

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

Date published: Mar 19, 1990

Citations

159 A.D.2d 638 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

People v. Giovannotto

We find that the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). However, as the…

People v. Byrd

Although a court may use the Probation Department as a preliminary factfinder in directing restitution, it…