The People v Quadir Stricklin
Categories
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Criminal law sentencing issue involving whether an eligible defendant must receive a youthful offender determination before sentencing.
The Supreme Court, Kings County, accepted the defendant's guilty plea to attempted murder in the second degree under Penal Law §§ 110.00 and 125.25(1) [New York attempt and second-degree murder provisions] and sentenced him to nine years' imprisonment plus five years of postrelease supervision, while also imposing a mandatory surcharge and fees.
The Appellate Division vacated the sentence and vacated the mandatory surcharge and fees, but left the conviction based on the guilty plea intact.
The record did not show that the sentencing court made the required youthful offender determination under Criminal Procedure Law § 720.20(1) [requires a court to make a youthful offender determination in every case where the defendant is eligible]. The surcharge and fees were also waived based on the People's consent and the court's interest-of-justice authority under CPL 420.35(2-a)(c) [authorizes waiver of certain surcharges and fees in qualifying circumstances].
Background
Quadir Stricklin pleaded guilty in Supreme Court, Kings County, to attempted murder in the second degree. He was sentenced to a determinate prison term of nine years followed by five years of postrelease supervision. He appealed from the judgment.
Lower Court Decision
The lower court convicted the defendant upon his guilty plea and imposed sentence, including imprisonment, postrelease supervision, and mandatory surcharge and fees. The appellate record, however, did not demonstrate that the court made a youthful offender determination despite the defendant's eligibility.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division modified the judgment by vacating the sentence and vacating the surcharge and fees, and remitted the matter to Supreme Court, Kings County, for a determination of whether the defendant should receive youthful offender treatment and then for resentencing. The conviction itself was affirmed as modified.
Legal Significance
This decision reinforces that Criminal Procedure Law § 720.20(1) requires a sentencing court to make a youthful offender determination in every eligible case, even if the defendant does not request it or agrees to forgo it in a plea bargain. A failure to do so requires vacatur of the sentence and remittal for the required determination and resentencing.
In New York criminal cases, an eligible youthful defendant cannot be sentenced without the court first making an explicit youthful offender determination; if the record does not show that determination, the sentence must be vacated even though the guilty plea conviction may remain in place.