Case ID: ad3d_101/html/0440-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Harold Jones, Appellant.
    [954 NYS2d 453]
   The resentencing proceeding imposing a term of postrelease supervision (FRS) was neither barred by double jeopardy nor otherwise unlawful (see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621 [2011]).

Defendant’s challenge to the voluntariness of the underlying 2003 guilty plea may not be raised on this appeal from the judgment of resentence (see People v Jordan, 16 NY3d 845 [2011]; see also CEL 450.30 [3]), and defendant is not entitled to specific performance of his original plea bargain, which did not mention a term of PRS (see People v Harper, 85 AD3d 617 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 903 [2011]). Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Richter, Román and Clark, JJ.