Summary
In People v. Yant (223 A.D.2d 747), this Court vacated the sentence imposed upon the appellant and remitted the matter to the County Court, Dutchess County, for resentencing based on the misapprehension by the court regarding its discretion under Penal Law § 70.25 (4) to impose concurrent sentences.
Summary of this case from People v. YantOpinion
January 29, 1996
Appeal from the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by vacating the sentence imposed; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Dutchess County, for resentencing.
The sentencing court's misapprehension regarding its discretion, pursuant to Penal Law § 70.25 (4), to impose a sentence of imprisonment that is to run concurrently with a sentence previously imposed by a court of another jurisdiction requires that the defendant be resentenced ( see, People v Vega, 181 A.D.2d 635; People v Jeffries, 166 A.D.2d 665, 666).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contention, which is raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find it to be without merit. Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.