Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, (1) by deleting the provision that the five terms of imprisonment imposed on the murder counts are to run consecutively and substituting therefor a provision that said terms of imprisonment shall run concurrently, (2) by deleting the provision that the five terms of imprisonment imposed on the criminally negligent homicide counts are to run consecutively and substituting therefor a provision that said terms shall run concurrently, and (3) by deleting the provision fixing restitution in the amount of $420,547.99; as so modified the judgments are affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for a hearing to determine the amount of restitution.
The defendant ignited a fire which ultimately resulted in the deaths of five people. However, as the People now concede, "[s]ince the deaths of the [five] victims resulted from the defendant's single act of arson, any sentences imposed should have run concurrently" (People v. Coleman, 153 A.D.2d 756, 757, citing Penal Law § 70.25; People v. Day, 73 N.Y.2d 208, 211-212; People v. Underwood, 52 N.Y.2d 882; see also, People v Truesdell, 70 N.Y.2d 809, 811; People v. Brathwaite, 63 N.Y.2d 839, 843). Furthermore, the People correctly concede that a hearing is necessary in order to determine the proper amount of restitution (see, e.g., People v. Collins, 163 A.D.2d 608; People v Robinson, 156 A.D.2d 731; People v. Thurmond, 148 A.D.2d 557, 558; People v. Walker, 140 A.D.2d 655). We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber and Sullivan, JJ., concur.