| People v Murrell |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 04272 [73 AD3d 598] |
| May 20, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Dominique Murrell, Appellant. |
—[*1] Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Timothy C. Stone of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard D. Carruthers, J.),rendered March 20, 2009, resentencing defendant to concurrent terms of 10 years, with fiveyears' postrelease supervision (PRS), unanimously affirmed.
The resentencing proceeding imposing a term of postrelease supervision was not barred bydouble jeopardy, since defendant was still serving his prison term at that time, and therefore hadno reasonable expectation of finality in his illegal sentence. In People v Williams (14 NY3d 198[2010]), the Court of Appeals concluded that double jeopardy principles prohibit the addition ofPRS to the sentences of defendants who have been released after completing their terms ofimprisonment. Although Williams did not involve persons still serving the prisonportions of their sentences, it is clear from the Court's rationale that there is no constitutionalimpediment to imposing PRS in that situation. The fact that this defendant was nearing the endof a long sentence does not warrant a different result.
We have considered and rejected defendant's due process argument. Defendant's statutoryclaims are similar to arguments that were rejected in Williams, or are otherwise withoutmerit (see People v Thomas, 68AD3d 514, 515 [2009]).
Finally, we note that we have already substantially reduced defendant's sentence on a priorappeal that did not involve any PRS issues (307 AD2d 821, 822 [2003], lv denied 1NY3d [*2]540 [2003]), and we perceive no basis for reducing thesentence any further. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Catterson, Renwick, Richter and Abdus-Salaam,JJ.