People v. Barnett
Cases that cite this one
13 later published cases cite this decision.
- State of Iowa v. Darryl B. Shears Jr. (Iowa 2018)
- KEVAN ANGLIN v. STATE OF FLORIDA (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2023)
- Charles R. Cavins v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. Ct. App. 2021)
- People v. Ford (Ill. App. Ct. 2016)
- MCCARTHY, RONALD E., PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
- People v. McCarthy (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
- City of New York v. College Point Sports Ass'n (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
- People v. Wright (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
- People v. Guise (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2000)
- People v. Tierno (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
- People v. Lynch (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
- People v. Kelly (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- People v. Lee (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed and
The court erred, however, in determining the amount of restitution to be $8,227 without holding a hearing on that issue. The court directed that defendant reimburse the New York State Police Department in that amount based upon an estimate of damage provided by that Department during the presentence investigation. Defendant did not make a statement at either the plea hearing or at sentencing sufficient to support the determination of the amount of restitution (see, People v Consalvo, 89 NY2d 140, 144-145). Consequently, the court was required to hold a hearing to determine the amount of restitution. Thus, we modify the judgment by vacating the amount of restitution awarded, and we remit the matter to Erie County Court for that purpose.
Finally, in view of defendant’s criminal record, we conclude that the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe (see, CPL 470.15 [6] [b]). (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, McCarthy, J.—Felony Driving While Intoxicated.) Present— Pine, J. P., Lawton, Doerr, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.