People v. Santiago

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that the defendant's Pennsylvania conviction could not serve as a predicate felony for second felony offender sentencing because he was 15 years old when convicted and could not have been prosecuted for the equivalent New York offense at that age. The Court also held that the claim was reviewable under the narrow exception to the preservation rule for sentences whose illegality is readily discernible from the trial record. It vacated the second felony offender adjudication and remitted the matter for resentencing, while otherwise affirming.

Holdings

1. A challenge to an enhanced sentence may be reviewed under the narrow exception to New York's preservation rule when the sentence's illegality is readily discernible from the trial record and the relevant facts are undisputed and contained in that record.
2. A foreign conviction of an offense equivalent to a New York felony cannot qualify as a predicate felony under Penal Law § 70.06(1)(b)(i) when the defendant was under the age at which New York permits criminal prosecution for the equivalent offense.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Court of Appeals could review defendant's challenge to the use of his Pennsylvania conviction as a predicate felony despite the lack of a specific objection on that ground at sentencing.
2. Whether a foreign felony conviction obtained when the defendant was 15 years old could qualify as a predicate felony under Penal Law § 70.06(1)(b)(i), when the equivalent New York offense could not have been prosecuted against a 15-year-old.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded