The People v. George Jordan
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
================================================================= This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------No. 172 SSM 26 The People &c., Respondent, v. George Jordan, Appellant. Submitted by Mark W. Zeno, for appellant. Submitted by Matthew C. Williams, for respondent. MEMORANDUM: The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, the resentence vacated and the original sentence reinstated. In February 2003, defendant pleaded guilty to attempted first degree robbery and was promised a sentence of seven years imprisonment. Although postrelease supervision (PRS) was - 1 - - 2 - SSM No. 26 discussed during the plea proceeding, Supreme Court did not inform defendant of the specific term of PRS it intended to impose. At sentencing, although Supreme Court mentioned PRS again, it did not pronounce a specific period of PRS. In September 2008 -- more than one year after defendant was released from prison -- defendant returned to court and Supreme Court, in error, resentenced him, adding a five year period of PRS. The Double Jeopardy Clause of the federal Constitution precludes a court from adding PRS to a defendant's sentence once the defendant has been released from imprisonment (see People v Williams, 14 NY3d 198, 217 [2010]). * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order reversed, the resentence vacated and the original sentence reinstated, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur. Decided June 24, 2010 - 2 -
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.
