¶1Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed and matter remitted to Erie County Court for further proceedings, in accordance with the following memorandum: The court erred in directing defendant to pay restitution without conducting a hearing to determine the correct amount. The sole basis for the court’s restitution order was a statement in the presentence report. This statement does not form a sufficient basis upon which to order restitution (see, People v Cheatum, 148 AD2d 986, Iv denied 74 NY2d 662; People v Dixon, 134 AD2d 877, 878; People v Sommer, 105 AD2d 1052). The order of restitution is therefore vacated and the matter is remitted to the sentencing court for a hearing on the proper amount of restitution. (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court, D’Amico, J.— robbery, first degree.) Present — Boomer, J. P., Green, Pine, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
156 A.D.2d 1022
People v. Mack
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 20, 1989
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 1989-12-20
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently July 2005
1 federal appellate ·
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1989-12-20
View the full empirical analysis of this case →