Legal Opinion · Concurrence

People v. Travis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 2, 2009Published

1Concurrence

Mercure, J.P

(concurring). I respectfully concur. It is my view

that, as a result of this Court’s decision in People v Henry (64 AD3d 804 [2009] [decided herewith]), it has become unclear which factors must be considered by a court imposing restitution as part of a sentence that also includes a period of incarceration. Pursuant to this Court’s long-standing precedent, a defendant’s ability to pay is a mandatory consideration when restitution is ordered, regardless of whether the sentence includes a period of incarceration. Thus, defendant’s ability to pay should be considered upon remittal.

As…

2Cases cited34 opinions

  1. Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. People v. CallahanNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. People v. SparberNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
  4. People v. FullerNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. People v. HorneNew York Court of Appeals · 2002

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API