Legal Opinion
People v. Lingle
New York Court of Appeals
Decided April 28, 2011No. 65, No. 66, No. 67, No. 68, No. 86, No. 87PublishedCited by 497 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Read, J.
In People v Sparber (10 NY3d 457 [2008]), we held that defendants subject to postrelease supervision (PRS) have a statutory right under CPL 380.20 and 380.40 for a judge to pronounce the PRS sentence in their presence in open court, and that the remedy when a judge neglects to do this is resentencing to correct the error. Although the facts in these six cases vary, they share two essential features: the judges who sentenced defendants did not pronounce PRS (i.e., they committed a Sparber error), and defendants were resentenced to PRS before completion of their…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Washington v. GlucksbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Bozza v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- People v. SparberNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
- People v. WilliamsNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
- People v. MinayaNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by497 opinions
- People v. DawkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. VelezNew York Court of Appeals · 2012
- People of State of New York v. HarrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. BoyerNew York Court of Appeals · 2013
- People v. EdwardsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
492 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.