Opinion
2021-03600 Ind. 141/19
06-09-2021
The People of the State of New York, respondent, v. Carlos A. Benitez, appellant.
Carol Kahn, New York, NY, for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
Carol Kahn, New York, NY, for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Kirsten A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
HECTOR D. LASALLE, P.J., MARK C. DILLON, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Edward T. McLoughlin, J.), rendered September 4, 2020, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the plea of guilty 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, quoting People v Catu, 4 N.Y.3d 242, 244-245; 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'" (People v Turner, 24 N.Y.3d at 258, quoting People v Catu, 4 N.Y.3d at 245), and "[w]ithout such procedures, vacatur of the plea is required" (People v Turner, 24 N.Y.3d at 258). 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 (see People v Boyd, 12 N.Y.3d 390, 393; People v Cabrera, 189 A.D.3d at 1609). 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 (see People v Boyd, 12 N.Y.3d at 393; 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.
In light of our determination, we do not reach the defendant's remaining contentions.
LASALLE, P.J., DILLON, IANNACCI and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.