AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. THOMAS P. DULANSKI, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed, in accordance with the following Memorandum: The Cattaraugus County District Attorney's Office and Sheriff's Department are not "victims" within the meaning of Penal Law § 60.27 (1); therefore, the court erred by ordering defendant to make restitution to these agencies of the expenses incurred in extraditing defendant from California to face felony charges. The court does not have authority to sentence defendant to reimburse a law enforcement agency for public monies expended as part of its law enforcement operating costs (see, People v Rowe, 152 A.D.2d 907, affd for reasons stated at App. Div. 75 N.Y.2d 948; People v Pfaudler, 164 A.D.2d 873; People v Purcell, 161 A.D.2d 812). That portion of the sentence must be vacated. In light of this determination, it is not necessary to address defendant's remaining argument.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. DULANSKI
(Jul 12, 1991)