Attorneys and Parties

Jahrell Madison
Defendant-Appellant
Attorneys: Patricia Pazner, Joshua M. Levine

The People
People-Respondent
Attorneys: Eric Gonzalez, Leonard Joblove, Melissa Owen, Jordan Najah

Brief Summary

Issue

Whether mandatory surcharges and fees must be imposed on a defendant who was under 21 at the time of the offense, in light of Criminal Procedure Law (CPL) 420.35(2-a) [permits the waiver of surcharges and fees for individuals who were less than 21 years old at the time of the crime].

Lower Court Held

The Supreme Court, Kings County, accepted Madison’s guilty plea to two counts of second-degree criminal possession of a weapon and imposed sentence, including the mandatory surcharge and fees.

What Was Overturned

The portion of the sentence imposing a mandatory surcharge and fees was vacated; the judgment was otherwise affirmed.

Why

Under CPL 420.35(2-a) [permits waiver of surcharges and fees for those under 21 at the time of the crime], and in the exercise of the Appellate Division’s interest-of-justice jurisdiction, with the People’s consent, the court vacated the surcharge and fees.

Background

Jahrell Madison pleaded guilty to two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and was sentenced by the Supreme Court, Kings County, on February 16, 2023. The sentence included a mandatory surcharge and fees. Madison appealed, challenging the imposition of the surcharge and fees based on eligibility for waiver due to his being under 21 at the time of the offense.

Lower Court Decision

The Supreme Court, Kings County (Eugene M. Guarino, J.), rendered judgment convicting Madison upon his plea of guilty to two counts of second-degree criminal possession of a weapon and imposed sentence, including the mandatory surcharge and fees.

Appellate Division Reversal

The Appellate Division modified the judgment by vacating the imposition of the mandatory surcharge and fees pursuant to CPL 420.35(2-a)(c) [permits the waiver of surcharges and fees for individuals who were less than 21 years old at the time of the crime], exercising its interest-of-justice jurisdiction and noting the People’s consent. As modified, the judgment was affirmed.

Legal Significance

Confirms that defendants who were under 21 at the time of the offense are eligible for waiver of mandatory surcharges and fees under CPL 420.35(2-a), and that the Appellate Division may exercise interest-of-justice jurisdiction to vacate such financial obligations on appeal, particularly where the People consent.

🔑 Key Takeaway

If a defendant was under 21 when the crime occurred, the mandatory surcharge and fees can be waived under CPL 420.35(2-a); appellate courts may modify judgments to remove these costs and affirm the conviction otherwise.