People v. Acosta

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department modified the defendant's judgment by striking the condition of probation requiring payment of mandatory surcharges and court fees, and otherwise affirmed. The court held that the defendant's waiver of appellate rights did not foreclose his challenge to that probation condition, which was not reasonably related to rehabilitation given his indigence and circumstances. The court declined to review unpreserved constitutional challenges to other probation conditions and held that the issue concerning a certificate of relief from disabilities was not properly appealable.

Holdings

1. Defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal foreclosed appellate review of his claim that the sentence was excessive.
2. The condition requiring defendant to pay $375 in mandatory surcharges and court fees as a condition of probation was stricken because, under the circumstances, it was not reasonably necessary to ensure a law-abiding life and was not reasonably related to rehabilitation.
3. Defendant's constitutional challenges to probation conditions 7 and 24 were unpreserved because they were raised for the first time on appeal, and the court declined to review them in the interest of justice.
4. The deferred issuance of the certificate of relief from disabilities was not properly before the Appellate Division because it was not part of the judgment and therefore was not appealable from the judgment of conviction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal foreclosed review of his excessive-sentence claim.
2. Whether requiring an indigent first-time offender with sporadic income to pay mandatory surcharges and court fees as a condition of probation was reasonably necessary and related to rehabilitation.
3. Whether defendant's constitutional vagueness, overbreadth, and First Amendment challenges to certain probation conditions were preserved for appellate review.
4. Whether the deferred issuance of a certificate of relief from disabilities was part of the criminal judgment and appealable from the judgment of conviction.

Disposition

other