People v Evans, Laquinn
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Criminal law—sufficiency of an indictment against a juvenile offender for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree.
Accepted the defendant’s guilty plea to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and imposed sentence.
The judgment of conviction was reversed, the guilty plea vacated, and count 3 of the indictment dismissed, with the case remitted on the remaining counts.
Count 3 was jurisdictionally defective because it failed to allege that the 15-year-old defendant possessed the firearm “on school grounds,” an essential element for juvenile offender liability under Penal Law § 30.00(2) [15-year-old criminal responsibility extends to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree only when the firearm is possessed on school grounds] and a prerequisite to indictment under CPL 190.71(a)(ii) [grand jury may not indict a 15-year-old for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree unless the firearm is possessed on school grounds, as defined in Penal Law § 220.00(14)]. A bare citation to Penal Law § 265.03 [criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree] did not cure the omission, and plea admissions that the conduct occurred within 1,000 feet of school grounds could not remedy the jurisdictional defect.
Background
Defendant, age 15, was indicted in connection with a shooting for attempted murder in the second degree, two counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (Penal Law § 265.03[3], [1][b]), and two counts of criminal possession of a weapon on school grounds (Penal Law § 265.01-a). He pleaded guilty, as a juvenile offender, to count 3 (Penal Law § 265.03[3]) and was sentenced.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Richmond County, rendered judgment on April 27, 2023, convicting the defendant upon his guilty plea to criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and imposing sentence.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division held that a jurisdictional defect in an indictment is nonwaivable by a guilty plea and can be raised for the first time on appeal. Because count 3 did not allege that the firearm was possessed on school grounds—a required element for indicting a 15-year-old under Penal Law § 30.00(2) and CPL 190.71(a)(ii)—the indictment did not charge a cognizable offense as to that count. The citation to Penal Law § 265.03(3) did not incorporate the missing element, and plea colloquy statements that the conduct occurred within 1,000 feet of school grounds did not cure the defect. The court reversed the judgment, vacated the plea, dismissed count 3, and remitted for further proceedings on the remaining counts.
Legal Significance
Clarifies that when prosecuting a 15-year-old for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, the indictment must expressly allege possession on school grounds to confer jurisdiction. Omitting this element renders the count jurisdictionally defective, not curable by statutory citation or plea admissions.
For juvenile offenders, an indictment for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree must allege possession on school grounds; otherwise, the count is jurisdictionally defective and must be dismissed even after a guilty plea.