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, etc., appellant, v. Vincent DeCASTRO, respondent.
Appeal by the People, as limited by their brief, from a sentence of the County Court, Rockland County (Resnik, J.), rendered May 17, 2005, imposed upon the conviction of the defendant of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, the sentence being a determinate term of imprisonment of three and one-half years.
ORDERED that the sentence is reversed, on the law, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Rockland County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.
The bargained-for determinate sentence of three and one-half years imprisonment imposed upon the defendant's conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, as a second felony offender, was illegal (see Penal Law § 70.06[3][b], [4][b] ). The defendant committed the crime before the enactment of the Drug Law Reform Act (L. 2004, ch. 738) (hereinafter the DLRA). Thus, he was not entitled to be sentenced under the DLRA (see People v. Torres, 26 A.D.3d 398, 809 N.Y.S.2d 187; People v. Goode, 25 A.D.3d 723, 809 N.Y.S.2d 128). In section 41(d-1) of the DLRA, the Legislature expressed its intent that, with certain exceptions not applicable herein, the ameliorative provisions of the act were not to be applied to crimes committed before the effective date of the act. Since the defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive a sentence which was illegal, the matter is remitted to the County Court, Rockland County, to give the defendant the option either to withdraw his plea or receive a legal sentence (see People v. Dabbs, 280 A.D.2d 611, 720 N.Y.S.2d 826; People v. Ruiz, 226 A.D.2d 747, 641 N.Y.S.2d 692).
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.
Decided: March 28, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)