From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Forman v. Potempa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 6, 1999
261 A.D.2d 671 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

May 6, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court (Canfield, J.).


Petitioner was convicted of the crime of manslaughter in the first degree and in December 1977 he was sentenced to a prison term of 8 1/3 to 25 years. Following his release on parole supervision, petitioner pleaded guilty to the crime of attempted grand larceny in the third degree and was sentenced to a prison term of 1 1/2 to 3 years in January 1996. Notwithstanding the sentencing court's failure to address the issue in the order of commitment, the sentence imposed upon petitioner in 1996 is required to be served consecutively with his preexisting unexpired 1977 sentence ( see, Penal Law § 70.25 [2-a]; Matter of White v. Van Zandt, 236 A.D.2d 763; Matter of Santiago v. Van Zandt, 236 A.D.2d 728, appeal dismissed 89 N.Y.2d 1085). We accordingly reject petitioner's contention that respondents improperly calculated his maximum sentence expiration date.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Crew III, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Forman v. Potempa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 6, 1999
261 A.D.2d 671 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Matter of Forman v. Potempa

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MICHAEL FORMAN, Appellant v. EVELYN POTEMPA, as Inmate…

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

Date published: May 6, 1999

Citations

261 A.D.2d 671 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
690 N.Y.S.2d 759

Citing Cases

Slater v. Goord

Supreme Court dismissed the petition and petitioner appeals, as limited by his brief, asserting that Supreme…

In the Matter of Soriano

Petitioner argues that, because the sentencing court was silent as to whether the 17-year sentence for…