Summary
This New York Appellate Division decision affirms a defendant's conviction for sexual abuse in the first degree and the subsequent revocation of his probation following new criminal charges and noncompliance. The court addressed the invalidity of the defendant's written appeal waiver, which preserved his right to challenge the trial court's denial of youthful offender treatment. Finding that the County Court properly exercised its discretion after weighing mitigating and aggravating factors, the appellate court upheld the denial. Additionally, the court affirmed the probation revocation, ruling that the record supported the violations by a preponderance of the evidence and that the admitted hearsay evidence was properly considered under applicable exceptions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the appellant’s waiver of the right to appeal was valid
- Whether the trial court erred in denying youthful‑offender status
- Whether the admission of the probation officer’s client‑contact list was proper hearsay evidence
- Whether the trial court abused its discretion in revoking probation and imposing the sentence
Holdings
- The waiver was invalid because the written form contained overbroad and inaccurate language and the oral colloquy was insufficient to cure the deficiencies.
- The trial court did not err; its denial was a permissible exercise of sentencing discretion.
- The admission was proper as a business record exception to the hearsay rule.
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion; the sentence was within the permissible range and not unduly harsh.
Key quotations
“The decision to grant or deny youthful offender status rests within the sound exercise of the sentencing court's discretion to determine if in the opinion of the court the interest of justice would be served by relieving the eligible youth from the onus of a criminal record.”
“[A]lthough a probation violation cannot be sustained based upon hearsay evidence alone, hearsay evidence is, nevertheless, admissible at a probation violation hearing and may be considered with other evidence in establishing a probation violation.”
Factual background
Defendant Jordan Terry pleaded guilty to sexual abuse in the first degree for forcibly engaging a 13‑year‑old when he was 17. He was sentenced to time served and ten years of probation with a possible youthful‑offender designation, which the trial court denied. While on probation he was arrested for harassment, resisting arrest, and other offenses, leading the trial court to find probation violations and impose a five‑year prison term.
Procedural history
The County Court of Saratoga County convicted the defendant of sexual abuse in the first degree after a guilty plea, declined youthful offender status, later revoked probation after alleged violations, and imposed a five‑year prison term. The defendant appealed both the conviction and the probation revocation.