PEOPLE v. JOSE (2025)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dineen Riviezzo, J.), rendered July 8, 2019, adjudicating him a youthful offender, upon his plea of guilty to robbery in the third degree, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is modified, on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by vacating the imposition of a mandatory surcharge and fee;  as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

“Criminal Procedure Law § 420.35(2–a) permits the waiver of surcharges and fees for individuals, like the defendant, who were less than 21 years old at the time of the subject crime” (People v. Dillon H., 229 A.D.3d 722, 723, 214 N.Y.S.3d 191 [internal quotation marks omitted]).  “This provision applies retroactively to cases, such as this one, that were pending on direct appeal on the effective date of the legislation” (People v. Torres, 225 A.D.3d 632, 632, 204 N.Y.S.3d 591;  see People v. Dyshawn B., 196 A.D.3d 638, 641, 152 N.Y.S.3d 131).

Pursuant to the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction, and as consented to by the People, we modify the judgment by vacating the mandatory surcharge and fee imposed upon the defendant at sentencing (see CPL 420.35[2–a][c];  People v. Dillon H., 229 A.D.3d at 723, 214 N.Y.S.3d 191).

DILLON, J.P., MILLER, WAN and HOM, JJ., concur.