From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Scott

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Mar 28, 2014
115 A.D.3d 1342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-03-28

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Percy L. SCOTT, Defendant–Appellant.

The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Barbara J. Davies of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (David A. Heraty of Counsel), for Respondent.



The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Barbara J. Davies of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (David A. Heraty of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, FAHEY, PERADOTTO, and WHALEN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM:

Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted murder in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 125.25[1] ). Defendant contends that County Court erred in failing to determine whether he was eligible for youthful offender status. Defendant, an eligible youth, pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea bargain that included a promised sentence and a waiver of the right to appeal. There was no mention during the plea proceedings whether he would be afforded youthful offender treatment.

“Upon conviction of an eligible youth, the court must order a [presentence] investigation of the defendant. After receipt of a written report of the investigation and at the time of pronouncing sentence the court must determine whether or not the eligible youth is a youthful offender” (CPL 720.20[1] ). A sentencing court must determine whether to grant youthful offender status to every defendant who is eligible for it because, inter alia, “[t]he judgment of a court as to which young people have a real likelihood of turning their lives around is just too valuable, both to the offender and to the community, to be sacrificed in plea bargaining” ( People v. Rudolph, 21 N.Y.3d 497, 501, 974 N.Y.S.2d 885, 997 N.E.2d 457).

We therefore hold the case and remit the matter to County Court to make and state for the record a determination whether defendant should be afforded youthful offender status ( see Rudolph, 21 N.Y.3d at 503, 974 N.Y.S.2d 885, 997 N.E.2d 457).

It is hereby ORDERED that the case is held, the decision is reserved and the matter is remitted to Erie County Court for further proceedings.


Summaries of

People v. Scott

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Mar 28, 2014
115 A.D.3d 1342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

People v. Scott

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Percy L. SCOTT…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Date published: Mar 28, 2014

Citations

115 A.D.3d 1342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
115 A.D.3d 1342
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 2187

Citing Cases

People v. Scott

Appeal from a judgment of the Erie County Court (Sheila A. DiTullio, J.), rendered June 16, 2009. The appeal…

People v. Mohamed

As the People correctly concede, defendant is an eligible youth, and the sentencing court must make "a…