Opinion
No. 2017-12245 Ind. No. 69/17
07-27-2022
The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Brian Wolfe, appellant.
Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, NY, for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, NY, for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, J.P., BETSY BARROS, REINALDO E. RIVERA, ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Edward T. McLoughlin, J.), rendered October 2, 2017, convicting him of course of sexual conduct against a child in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the plea is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Dutchess County, for further proceedings on the indictment.
"[A] trial court has the constitutional duty to ensure that a defendant, before pleading guilty, has a full understanding of what the plea connotes and its consequences" (People v Turner, 24 N.Y.3d 254, 258 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Cabrera, 189 A.D.3d 1609, 1609). "To meet due process requirements, a defendant must be aware of the postrelease supervision component of that sentence in order to knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently choose among alternative courses of action [and,] [w]ithout such procedures, vacatur of the plea is required" (People v Turner, 24 N.Y.3d at 258 [citation and internal quotation marks omitted]). "It is not enough for a court to generally inform a defendant that a term of postrelease supervision will be imposed as a part of the sentence" (People v Cabrera, 189 A.D.3d at 1609, citing People v Boyd, 12 N.Y.3d 390, 393). "Rather, for a plea of guilty to be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, the court must inform the defendant of either the specific period of postrelease supervision that will be imposed or, at the least, the maximum potential duration of postrelease supervision that may be imposed" (People v Benitez, 195 A.D.3d 739, 740; see People v Cabrera, 189 A.D.3d at 1609).
Here, at the plea proceeding, the County Court did not specify the period of postrelease supervision to be imposed or, alternatively, the maximum potential duration of postrelease supervision that could be imposed. As the People concede, the court's failure to so advise the defendant prevented his plea from being knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
Accordingly, the judgment must be reversed, the plea of guilty vacated, and the matter remitted to the County Court, Dutchess County, for further proceedings on the indictment.
DUFFY, J.P., BARROS, RIVERA and MILLER, JJ., concur.