From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gonzalez

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
Apr 26, 2019
171 A.D.3d 1502 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

405 KA 16–01367

04-26-2019

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Luis GONZALEZ, Defendant–Appellant.

FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (CHRISTINE M. COOK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (BRADLEY W. OASTLER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.


FRANK H. HISCOCK LEGAL AID SOCIETY, SYRACUSE (CHRISTINE M. COOK OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

WILLIAM J. FITZPATRICK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SYRACUSE (BRADLEY W. OASTLER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, LINDLEY, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the case is held, the decision is reserved and the matter is remitted to Onondaga County Court for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of assault in the first degree ( Penal Law § 120.10[1] ), defendant contends that County Court erred in failing to determine whether he should be afforded youthful offender status. We agree. Because defendant was convicted of an armed felony offense (see CPL 1.20[41] ), he is ineligible for a youthful offender adjudication unless the court determines that one of two mitigating factors is present (see CPL 720.10[2][a][ii] ; [3] ). If the court, in its discretion, determines that neither of the CPL 720.10(3) factors is present and states the reasons for that determination on the record, then no further determination is required (see People v. Middlebrooks, 25 N.Y.3d 516, 527, 14 N.Y.S.3d 296, 35 N.E.3d 464 [2015] ; People v. Dukes, 147 A.D.3d 1534, 1535, 47 N.Y.S.3d 567 [4th Dept. 2017] ). If, on the other hand, the court determines that one or more of those factors are present, and therefore defendant is an eligible youth, the court then must determine whether he is a youthful offender (see Middlebrooks, 25 N.Y.3d at 527, 14 N.Y.S.3d 296, 35 N.E.3d 464 ; Dukes, 147 A.D.3d at 1535, 47 N.Y.S.3d 567 ). Here, the court failed to follow the procedure set forth in Middlebrooks. We therefore hold the case, reserve decision, and remit the matter to County Court "to make and state for the record ‘a determination of whether defendant is a youthful offender’ " ( People v. Wilson, 151 A.D.3d 1836, 1837, 58 N.Y.S.3d 775 [4th Dept. 2017], quoting People v. Rudolph, 21 N.Y.3d 497, 503, 974 N.Y.S.2d 885, 997 N.E.2d 457 [2013] ).


Summaries of

People v. Gonzalez

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
Apr 26, 2019
171 A.D.3d 1502 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

People v. Gonzalez

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. LUIS GONZALEZ…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

Date published: Apr 26, 2019

Citations

171 A.D.3d 1502 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 3191
99 N.Y.S.3d 546

Citing Cases

People v. Williams

"If the court, in its discretion, determines that neither of the CPL 720.10 (3) factors is present and states…

People v. Gonzalez

Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Anthony F. Aloi, J.), rendered August 1, 2016. The…