Opinion ID: 784975
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: New York Youthful Offender Adjudications

Text: 11 Article 720 of the New York Criminal Procedure Law establishes the legal status of youthful offender, which courts may assign to convicted defendants between the ages of 16 and 19 who meet certain conditions. N.Y.Crim. Proc. Law §§ 720.10(1) & (2), 720.20(1) (McKinney 2003). Courts have the discretion to designate an eligible convicted defendant a youthful offender if in the opinion of the court the interest of justice would be served by relieving the eligible youth from the onus of a criminal record.... Id. § 720.20(1). Once a convicted defendant is adjudicated a youthful offender, his conviction is deemed vacated and replaced by a youthful offender finding, id. § 720.20(3), and the court imposes a youthful offender sentence under N.Y. Penal Law § 60.02. A court's youthful offender finding and imposition of a youthful offender sentence are together designated a youthful offender adjudication. N.Y.Crim. Proc. Law § 720.10(6). 12 Defendant argues that the District Court erred in counting his youthful offender adjudication as a prior adult felony conviction for the purpose of calculating his base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a), because the youthful offender adjudication had the effect of vacat[ing] and replac[ing] his conviction under New York law. N.Y.Crim. Proc. Law § 720.20(3). Thus, in defendant's view, the 1996 offense yielded no conviction that could be relevant to his sentencing for the instant offense. 13 The Government points out, however, that irrespective of the title New York law assigns a youthful offender adjudication after the fact, a conviction under New York criminal law is a prerequisite for a youthful offender adjudication. See Capital Newspapers Div. of the Hearst Corp. v. Moynihan, 71 N.Y.2d 263, 268, 519 N.E.2d 825, 827, 525 N.Y.S.2d 24, 26 (1988) ([Y]outhful offender status is ... determined only after [a] defendant has been tried and convicted criminally.); Niver v. State, 1 Misc.3d 579, 770 N.Y.S.2d 577, 581 (Ct.Cl. 2003) (observing that the benefits of a youthful offender adjudication flow to an individual only after being arrested, charged, tried and convicted as a criminal defendant, in the course of holding that a youthful offender adjudication constituted a prior conviction for the purposes of New York's unjust conviction statute). Moreover, New York law treats youthful offenders as adults in many respects, despite the terminology the youthful offender statutes impose; youthful offenders may be tried and convicted in adult forums, see N.Y.Crim. Proc. Law § 720.20, and, although subject to a four-year maximum term of imprisonment, youthful offenders convicted of a felony are committed, as are adult felons, to the custody of New York's Department of Correctional Services, see N.Y. Penal Law §§ 70.20; 60.02(2), 70.00(2)(e). 14 The Government further points out that New York law itself permits consideration of youthful offender adjudications in a variety of contexts analogous to calculation of the defendant's base offense level under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Sentencing judges in New York courts may take into account a prior youthful offender adjudication when evaluating a defendant's criminal history. See People v. Davis, 267 A.D.2d 597, 701 N.Y.S.2d 130, 131 (3d Dep't 1999) (noting that sentencing court properly took into consideration, inter alia, the fact that defendant had failed to learn from the opportunity presented to him by the youthful offender adjudication afforded for the prior crime he committed at age 16); People v. Sapp, 169 A.D.2d 659, 565 N.Y.S.2d 79, 79 (1st Dep't 1991) (affirming a sentence in part on the basis of defendant's criminal history, including the fact that defendant was previously adjudicated a youthful offender in a prior attempted robbery conviction); People v. Thiel, 51 A.D.2d 1093, 381 N.Y.S.2d 354, 354 (3d Dep't 1976) (affirming sentence in part on the basis of defendant's stormy history with our criminal justice system, including a youthful offender adjudication). A youthful offender adjudication may also be considered in determining a defendant's status under the Sex Offender Registration Act in the State of New York. See People v. Vite-Acosta, 184 Misc.2d 206, 708 N.Y.S.2d 583, 585 (Sup.Ct. Bronx County 2000) ([A]lthough a youthful offender adjudication is not a conviction, it is still a reliable indicator of wrongdoing and therefore should be considered in assessing an offender's likelihood of re-offense and danger to public safety.). A prior youthful offender adjudication in a defendant's criminal history may also be considered in parole and bail determinations under New York law. See Pina v. Hammock, 109 Misc.2d 980, 441 N.Y.S.2d 344, 346 (Sup.Ct. Cayuga County 1981), aff'd, 89 A.D.2d 799, 453 N.Y.S.2d 479, 480 (4th Dep't 1982); Brunetti v. Scotti, 77 Misc.2d 388, 353 N.Y.S.2d 630, 633 (Sup.Ct. New York County 1974).