People v D. (Anonymous), Shemar
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Criminal law and firearms licensing—scope of appeal waivers and constitutional challenges to New York's pistol licensing scheme following New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, and discretionary vacatur of mandatory surcharges for youthful offenders.
The Supreme Court, Kings County accepted the defendant's guilty plea to attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, adjudicated him a youthful offender, and imposed sentence including a mandatory surcharge and fees.
Only the mandatory surcharge and fees were vacated; the adjudication and conviction were otherwise affirmed.
The appellate court exercised its interest-of-justice jurisdiction, based on the People's consent, to vacate the financial impositions under CPL 420.35(2-a)(c) [authorizes vacating mandatory surcharges and fees in the interest of justice under specified circumstances]. All other challenges failed because the defendant validly waived his right to appeal, and the facial challenge to New York's firearms licensing scheme lacked merit.
Background
The defendant pleaded guilty to attempted criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and was adjudicated a youthful offender. On appeal, he argued: (1) the minimum age requirement in Penal Law § 400.00(1)(a) [minimum age requirement for pistol license] is unconstitutional as applied to 18–20-year-olds; (2) New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen invalidated New York's entire firearm licensing scheme; and (3) his sentence was excessive. The record showed he knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently executed an appeal waiver.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Kings County (Jill Konviser, J.) rendered judgment on January 17, 2023, adjudicating the defendant a youthful offender upon his guilty plea and imposing sentence with a mandatory surcharge and fees.
Appellate Division Reversal
Modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice and with the People's consent, by vacating the mandatory surcharge and fees under CPL 420.35(2-a)(c). In all other respects, the judgment was affirmed. The court held the appeal waiver valid, which barred review of the as-applied challenge to Penal Law § 400.00(1)(a) and the excessive sentence claim. The separate facial challenge to New York's licensing scheme post-Bruen was not barred by the waiver but was rejected on the merits.
Legal Significance
Affirms that a valid appeal waiver forecloses appellate review of as-applied constitutional challenges to the pistol licensing age requirement and excessiveness of sentence claims, while clarifying that a facial challenge to the licensing scheme post-Bruen may be reached but fails on the merits. Confirms the court's authority, with prosecutorial consent, to vacate mandatory surcharges and fees for youthful offenders in the interest of justice under CPL 420.35(2-a)(c).
With a valid appeal waiver, most sentencing and as-applied constitutional challenges are barred; Bruen does not render New York's entire firearm licensing scheme facially unconstitutional; and mandatory surcharges and fees may be vacated for youthful offenders in the interest of justice when the People consent.