BILL NUMBER: S8944
SPONSOR: MYRIE
 
TITLE OF BILL:
An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to certain guil-
ty pleas
 
PURPOSE:
This bill will increase the Court's discretion to accept pleas and to
impose sentences with the consent of the parties.
 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1 of the bill amends Criminal Procedure Law (CPL) 220.10(5) to
add a new paragraph (i) allowing courts to accept pleas below current
statutory plea reduction thresholds with the consent of the prosecutor
and defendant.
Section 2 of the bill amends CPL § 220.30(3)(b) to add a new subpara-
graph (x) allowing courts to accept pleas below current statutory plea
reduction thresholds with the consent of the prosecutor and defendant.
Section 3 of the bill amends CPL § 220.10(5) to add a new paragraph
(j) allowing courts to impose upon predicate felony offenders any
sentence authorized for offenders without such predicate convictions.
Section 4 of the bill provides that the act is effective immediately and
applies prospectively to all pleas taken and sentences imposed on or
after the effective date.
 
JUSTIFICATION:
This proposal would allow courts, with the consent of the prosecutor and
the defendant, to: (i) accept pleas below current statutory plea
reduction thresholds; and (ii) impose upon predicate felony offenders
sentences authorized for offenders without such predicate status. The
Criminal Procedure Law contains multiple-mostly post-indictment-restric-
tions on plea bargaining that often frustrate courts' and parties' abil-
ity to negotiate acceptable, fair, and just dispositions because of
requirements that defendants plead to more serious crimes, often with
higher mandatory minimum sentences. The first prong of this proposal
seeks to ameliorate the unfairness and inefficiency of the present stat-
utory scheme by allowing a plea to go forward despite the restrictions
mandating a more serious plea and sentence when the court and the prose-
cution agree that it is just to do so. With the concurrence of the
People, the court may determine that the plea is in the interest of
justice in light of the nature and circumstances of crime, the available
evidence, and the history and character of the defendant. This multi-
factored assessment and finding must be placed on the record to ensure
appropriate use of this new discretion.
Current law imposes mandatory minimum sentences which increase if a
defendant has one or more predicate felony convictions. There are cases,
however, where the court, the defendant and the prosecutor agree that
the circumstances of a crime and the defendant's criminal history should
allow a guilty plea with a promised sentence lower than that required
for such predicate felony offenders. For example, a defendant with a
predicate felony conviction pleading guilty to a Class D non-violent
felony (other than a narcotics crime), such as the unarmed burglarizing
of a non-residential building without causing any injuries, must receive
a minimum indeterminate sentence of 2-4 years, even if the prosecutor,
defendant and court believe a lower sentence is appropriate. In such
circumstances, under current law, the court is powerless to accept a
plea with a promised sentence of less than the statutory 2-4 year mini-
mum term.
This legislation would also allow the court, on consent of the People,
to accept a guilty plea with a promised sentence below current mandatory
minimum thresholds for predicate felony offenders "when, upon review of
the nature and circumstances of the criminal conduct, the available
evidence and the history and character of the defendant, the prosecutor
and the court are of the opinion that the plea permitted by this  
LEGIS-
LATION is in the interest of justice." When such a lesser sentence is
appropriate, the court may then impose a sentence that would be author-
ized if the offender were not a predicate felon. The prosecution is
explicitly permitted to condition such a plea on the defendant being
adjudicated as a second felony, second felony drug, second violent felo-
ny, or persistent violent felony offender, as applicable, to allow for
more serious penalties to be imposed were such a defendant to subse-
quently reoffend despite being offered this leniency.
The plea provision and the sentencing provision may be utilized simul-
taneously or separately depending on the circumstances of the negotiated
disposition.
 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
New Bill.
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
TBD
 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately and shall apply to pleas entered
and sentences imposed on or after such date.

Statutes affected:
S8944: 220.10 criminal procedure law, 220.10(5) criminal procedure law, 220.30 criminal procedure law, 220.30(3) criminal procedure law