Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.
Since the defendant had not yet completed his originally-imposed sentence of imprisonment when he was resentenced, the resentencing to a term including the statutorily required period of postrelease supervision did not subject him to double jeopardy or violate his right to due process of law ( see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621).
A court to which a matter has been remitted for resentencing solely for the purpose of imposing a required term of postrelease supervision does not have the authority to consider whether to reduce the defendant's sentence as a whole ( id.).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.