Summary
The Appellate Division, Second Department, modified the defendant's judgment by vacating his sentence and remitting the matter for a youthful offender determination and resentencing. The court held that Criminal Procedure Law § 720.20(1) requires an explicit youthful offender determination for an eligible youth, and directed the trial court to reconsider mandatory surcharges and fees after that determination.
Holdings
- Criminal Procedure Law § 720.20(1) requires the court to make a youthful offender determination in every case where the defendant is eligible, including when the defendant does not request youthful offender treatment or agrees to forgo it as part of a plea bargain.
- When a defendant is an eligible youth, the court must explicitly determine on the record whether to afford youthful offender treatment.
- Upon determination of the defendant's youthful offender status and resentencing, the Supreme Court must reconsider the imposition of mandatory surcharges and fees.
Questions Presented
- Whether the sentence must be vacated and the matter remitted where the defendant was eligible for youthful offender treatment but the record did not show that the court made a youthful offender determination.
- Whether mandatory surcharges and fees must be reconsidered upon youthful offender determination and resentencing.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (4)
- People v. Suckoo, 236 AD3d 830, 830(followed)
- People v. Carranza, 216 AD3d 814, 814-815(followed)
- People v. Rudolph, 21 NY3d 497, 501(followed)
- People v. Steele, 244 AD3d 57, 64-65(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…