Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Gerald DUNN, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), rendered March 1, 1999, as, upon convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, imposed a sentence which, inter alia, directed him to pay restitution.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed insofar as appealed from, the sentence is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Dutchess County, for resentencing in accordance herewith.
The court sentenced the defendant, as promised, to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 9 to 18 years and imposed a $150 surcharge and a $5 criminal victim's assistance fee. After the negotiated sentence was imposed, the prosecutor sought restitution based on the mistaken belief that the defendant's accomplices had been ordered to pay restitution. Although not part of the negotiated sentence, the court ordered the defendant to pay restitution in an amount to be agreed upon by the parties or fixed pursuant to a hearing. In light of the restitution order, the court waived “court costs”. The People failed to seek the restitution hearing within the time imposed by the court.
On appeal, the defendant claims that the matter should be remitted to the County Court for resentencing so that the court can clarify the sentence to be imposed. We agree. It is unclear what the County Court intended when it waived “court costs” upon directing the defendant to pay restitution. Since the People did not pursue restitution and now concede that restitution is not warranted, upon remittitur, the County Court should resentence the defendant in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 06, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)