Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed a criminal judgment convicting Herbert Bruno upon his guilty plea to attempted promoting prostitution in the second degree and imposing incarceration followed by probation. The court modified the judgment by deleting an additional probation condition barring the defendant from locations predominantly frequented by persons under 18, concluding that the condition was improperly imposed because the sentencing court had intended to strike it.
Holdings
- Under Penal Law § 65.10, probation conditions must be reasonably necessary to ensure that the defendant leads a law-abiding life or to assist the defendant in doing so, must be tailored to the probationer, and may include conditions reasonably related to rehabilitation.
- The Supreme Court properly imposed the standard probation condition requiring the defendant to support dependents and meet other family responsibilities because the defendant had children whom he was obligated to support.
- The Supreme Court properly imposed Additional Condition Nos. 3, 5, 7, and 8 because those conditions were reasonably related to the defendant's rehabilitation and necessary to ensure that he would lead a law-abiding life.
- Additional Condition No. 12 was improperly imposed and had to be deleted because the record showed that the Supreme Court intended to strike it after defense counsel's objection.
- The sentence imposed was not excessive.
Questions Presented
- Whether the probation conditions requiring family support and other family responsibilities were properly imposed.
- Whether the additional probation conditions concerning sexually explicit services and materials, computer activity, and probation searches were reasonably related to rehabilitation and necessary to promote lawful conduct.
- Whether Additional Condition No. 12, prohibiting the defendant from being at locations predominantly frequented by persons under 18 without permission, should be deleted because the sentencing court intended to strike it.
- Whether the sentence was excessive.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (5)
- People v. Dranchuk, 203 A.D.3d 741, 742(followed)
- People v. Hakes, 32 N.Y.3d 624, 628(followed)
- People v. Hale, 93 N.Y.2d 454, 461(followed)
- People v. Archibald, 241 A.D.3d 837, 839(followed)
- People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.