To the extent defendant contends that the court abused its discretion in determining that his reduced sentence would remain consecutive to the term he is serving on a murder conviction, the argument is academic. The court lacked any authority under the 2004 DLRA to modify the sentence to run concurrently to the earlier sentence instead of consecutively (see People v Vaughan,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
PEOPLE v. JAMISON
63 A.D.3d 460 (2009)
879 N.Y.S.2d 714
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RANDOLPH JAMISON, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided June 9, 2009.
Decided June 9, 2009.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
