Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Clarence ROSS, Defendant–Appellant.
Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Tara A. Collins, J.), rendered September 22, 2022, convicting defendant, upon his pleas of guilty, of attempted robbery in the second degree and robbery in the third degree, and sentencing him to consecutive terms of one year, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of vacating the surcharges and fees imposed at sentencing, and otherwise affirmed.
As the People concede, defendant is entitled to an express youthful offender determination pursuant to People v. Rudolph, 21 N.Y.3d 497, 974 N.Y.S.2d 885, 997 N.E.2d 457 (2013) on indictment No. 952/20. However, for reasons not fully explained in his briefs, defendant explicitly requests this matter not be remanded for a youthful offender determination and instead requests this Court adjudicate him a youthful offender.
While this Court has previously granted youthful offender treatment as a matter of discretion, such adjudication has come after the trial court has first made an explicit youthful offender determination on the record at sentencing (see e.g. People v. Steven B., 147 A.D.3d 493, 46 N.Y.S.3d 779 [1st Dept. 2017]; People v. Patric T., 137 A.D.3d 659, 26 N.Y.S.3d 863 [1st Dept. 2016]; People v. Regina L., 129 A.D.3d 533, 10 N.Y.S.3d 431 [1st Dept. 2015]; People v. Maria M., 102 A.D.3d 402, 403, 955 N.Y.S.2d 877 [1st Dept. 2013]). Because the trial court did not make the requisite explicit determination, this matter can only be remanded for resentencing, including a youthful offender determination (see Rudolph, 21 N.Y.3d 497, 974 N.Y.S.2d 885, 997 N.E.2d 457; see e.g. People v. Johnson, 198 A.D.3d 544, 152 N.Y.S.3d 803 [1st Dept. 2021]; People v. Catlett, 196 A.D.3d 418, 146 N.Y.S.3d 780 [1st Dept. 2021]; People v. Lugo, 194 A.D.3d 495, 143 N.Y.S.3d 533 [1st Dept. 2021]; People v. Shabazz, 183 A.D.3d 494, 122 N.Y.S.3d 512 [1st Dept. 2020]; People v. Frye, 174 A.D.3d 440, 101 N.Y.S.3d 830 [1st Dept. 2019]; People v. Rodriguez, 173 A.D.3d 579, 580, 100 N.Y.S.3d 870 [1st Dept. 2019]; People v. Maldonado, 163 A.D.3d 407, 76 N.Y.S.3d 405 [1st Dept. 2018]; People v. Marquez, 149 A.D.3d 544, 50 N.Y.S.3d 266 [1st Dept. 2017]). We further decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction (see People v. Blanco, 143 A.D.3d 616, 39 N.Y.S.3d 760 [1st Dept. 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 1142, 52 N.Y.S.3d 294, 74 N.E.3d 679 [2017]).
Notwithstanding, we vacate the surcharges and fees imposed on defendant at sentencing (see People v. Chirinos, 190 A.D.3d 434, 135 N.Y.S.3d 641 [1st Dept. 2021]). We note that the People do not oppose this relief.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 2010-, 2010A
Decided: April 11, 2024
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)