9.28 - 4. MaXImum And Minimum Sentencing Options

• Jurisdiction: New York

4. Maximum and Minimum Sentencing Options

Even though a specific sentence or probation may have been discussed during the bargaining process, the full scope of sentencing alternatives (including the possibility of fines) must be revealed to the defendant. The possibility that he may be treated under special sentencing alternatives such as are provided by youthful offender statutes and narcotics statutes should also be discussed.

The defendant should be advised about parole board procedures, sentence reduction for good behavior and the minimum confinement prior to parole board review. Advise him also that the court lacks power over parole board determinations where the defendant will serve his sentence.¹⁷⁰⁷ Violent offenders must be told of “post release supervision”¹⁷⁰⁸ and they must have an opportunity to object to it.¹⁷⁰⁹

--------

Notes:

^[1707] . It is not coercive for the court to inform defendant prior to his entry of a guilty plea that he would receive a heavier sentence if he proceeded to trial. People v. Stephens, 188 A.D.2d 345, 591 N.Y.S.2d 25 (1st Dep’t 1992); People v. Rice, 18 A.D.3d 351, 795 N.Y.S.2d 226 (1st Dep’t 2005); People v. Pagan, 297 A.D.2d 582, 747 N.Y.S.2d 174 (1st Dep’t), lv. denied, 99 N.Y.2d 562, 754 N.Y.S.2d 215 (2002).

^[1708] . N.Y. Penal Law § 70.45. The Court of Appeals vacated a conviction where the judge failed to advise the defendant of mandatory post-release supervision during the plea colloquy. See People v. Catu, 4 N.Y.3d 242, 792 N.Y.S.2d 887 (2005); People v. Cintron, 18 A.D.3d 322, 795 N.Y.S.2d 531 (1st Dep’t 2005), People v. Feehan, 18 A.D.3d 279, 796 N.Y.S.2d 42 (1st Dep’t 2005); People v. Jachimowicz, 292 A.D.2d 688, 738 N.Y.S.2d 770 (3d Dep’t 2002); People v. Goss, 286 A.D.2d 180, 733 N.Y.S.2d 310 (3d Dep’t 2001).

^[1709] . People v. Turner, 24 N.Y.3d 254, 997 N.Y.S.2d 671 (2014).