Court Opinion

ID: 4084049
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-10-07 23:50:53.344325+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:23.932763
License: Public Domain

Appeal from an adjudication of the Supreme Court, Erie
   
   *1413
   
  County (M. William Boiler, A.J.), rendered June 8, 2012. The adjudication revoked defendant’s probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.
 

  It is hereby ordered that the adjudication so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by directing that all of the sentences shall run concurrently with respect to each other and as modified the adjudication is affirmed.
 

  Memorandum: Defendant was adjudicated a youthful offender on January 6, 2012 and was sentenced to, inter alia, concurrent terms of five years of probation with respect to the three crimes of which he was convicted. Defendant subsequently admitted that he had violated the conditions of his probation, and he now appeals from an adjudication that revoked his probation and sentenced him to three terms of incarceration of lVs to 4 years, two of which were ordered to run consecutively to each other. Defendant’s sentence thus aggregates to a term of incarceration of 22/s to 8 years, and we agree with defendant that the sentence is illegal. “[Hjaving adjudicated defendant a youthful offender, [Supreme C]ourt was without authority to impose consecutive sentences in excess of four years”
  
   (People v Jorge N.T.,
  
  70 AD3d 1456, 1458 [2010],
  
   lv denied
  
  14 NY3d 889 [2010] [internal quotation marks omitted];
  
   see People v Cory T.,
  
  59 AD3d 1063, 1064 [2009]). We therefore modify the adjudication by directing that all of the sentences shall run concurrently with respect to each other
  
   (see People v Christopher T.,
  
  48 AD3d 1131, 1131-1132 [2008]). The sentence as modified is not unduly harsh or severe. Present — Smith, J.P, Centra, Fahey, Garni and Whalen, JJ.