From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Floyd

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 28, 1984
61 N.Y.2d 895 (N.Y. 1984)

Opinion

Decided February 28, 1984

Appeal from the Erie County Court, JOSEPH F. FORMA, J.

Rose H. Sconiers, Joseph B. Mistrett and Charles D. Halvorsen for appellant.

Richard J. Arcara, District Attorney ( John J. DeFranks and Don I. Dally of counsel), for respondent.


MEMORANDUM.

The order of the County Court should be modified to the extent of vacating the penalty assessment and, as so modified, affirmed.

Subdivision 1 of section 60.35 of the Penal Law mandates the imposition of a penalty assessment (now denominated a "mandatory surcharge", L 1983, ch 15, § 2) upon a conviction for a felony, a misdemeanor, or a violation. CPL 720.35 (subd 1) states that a "youthful offender adjudication is not a judgment of conviction". When the language of a statute is clear and unambiguous, the court is constrained to give effect to the plain meaning of the statute's words (McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes, § 76; Eaton v New York City Conciliation Appeals Bd., 56 N.Y.2d 340).

The People's contention that the imposition of the penalty assessment was proper in this case because CPL 720.20 (subd 1) requires that a youthful offender adjudication be based on a conviction must be rejected. Subdivision 4 of section 60.35 of the Penal Law states that: "Any person who has paid a mandatory surcharge * * * based upon a conviction that is subsequently reversed * * * shall be entitled to a refund". CPL 720.20 (subd 3) requires that "[u]pon determining that an eligible youth is a youthful offender, the court must direct that the conviction be deemed vacated and replaced by a youthful offender finding". Inasmuch as a mandatory vacatur of conviction pursuant to CPL 720.20 (subd 3) has the practical and legal effect of a reversal, subdivision 4 of section 60.35 of the Penal Law precludes the imposition of a penalty assessment based on youthful offender adjudications (see People v Gruber, 118 Misc.2d 363).

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, JONES, WACHTLER, MEYER, SIMONS and KAYE concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order modified in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Floyd

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 28, 1984
61 N.Y.2d 895 (N.Y. 1984)
Case details for

People v. Floyd

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FLOYD J., Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 28, 1984

Citations

61 N.Y.2d 895 (N.Y. 1984)
474 N.Y.S.2d 476
462 N.E.2d 1194

Citing Cases

Pitt v. Feagles

We reject that contention. First, the Court of Appeals has held that "a mandatory vacatur of conviction…

Pitt v. Feagles

We reject that contention. First, the Court of Appeals has held that "a mandatory vacatur of conviction…