People v. SmithPeople v. Smith
—Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed in accordance with the following Memorandum: Viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes,
The sentencing court erred, however, in directing that the term of imprisonment imposed on the 15th count, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, be served consecutively to the term imposed on the 14th count, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree. Sentences must be imposed to run concurrently "for two or more offenses committed through a single act” (