| People v Guillen |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 05737 [85 AD3d 1201] |
| June 28, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v GinaGuillen, Appellant. |
—[*1] Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Karen WigleWeiss, and Ayelet Sela of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Latella,J.), imposed September 16, 2009, which, upon her conviction of assault in the first degree andcriminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, imposed a period ofpostrelease supervision of three years in addition to the determinate term of imprisonmentoriginally imposed on May 10, 2005.
Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.
Since the defendant had not yet completed her originally imposed sentence of imprisonmentwhen she was resentenced, resentencing her to a term which included the statutorily requiredperiod of postrelease supervision did not subject her to double jeopardy or violate her right to dueprocess (see People v Lingle, 16NY3d 621 [2011]; People vMcCoy, 84 AD3d 655 [2011]; People v Myrick, 84 AD3d 1272 [2011]; People v Burgos, 84 AD3d 975[2011]; People v Hoffman, 84AD3d 978 [2011]; People vDeJesus, 84 AD3d 832 [2011]). Moreover, the Supreme Court had no discretion toreconsider the originally imposed term of imprisonment in resentencing the defendant solely forthe purpose of imposing a required term of postrelease supervision (see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621[2011]; People v Myrick, 84 AD3d 1272 [2011]; People v DeJesus, 84 AD3d 832 [2011]).
The period of postrelease supervision imposed at resentencing was not excessive (seePeople v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Rivera, J.P., Florio, Austin and Cohen, JJ., concur.