People v Jiggetts

Annotate this Case
People v Jiggetts 2013 NY Slip Op 05226 Decided on July 10, 2013 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on July 10, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO, J.P.
THOMAS A. DICKERSON
SANDRA L. SGROI
SYLVIA HINDS-RADIX, JJ.
2012-03239
(Ind. No. 5219/01)

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent,

v

William Jiggetts, appellant.




Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Dina Zloczower of
counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard
Joblove and Jodi L. Mandel of
counsel), for respondent.


DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.), imposed March 23, 2012, upon his conviction of manslaughter in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, the resentence being a period of postrelease supervision in addition to the terms of imprisonment previously imposed on May 21, 2002.

ORDERED that the resentence is affirmed.

Inasmuch as the defendant had not yet completed serving his originally imposed sentence of imprisonment when he was resentenced, his resentencing to a term including the statutorily required period of postrelease supervision did not violate the double jeopardy and due process clauses of the United States Constitution (see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621, 630-632; People v Pemberton, 93 AD3d 681; People v Mills, 90 AD3d 1076; People v Louis, 90 AD3d 1075; People v Dawkins, 87 AD3d 550).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
ANGIOLILLO, J.P., DICKERSON, SGROI and HINDS-RADIX, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.