N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Penal / PART Sentences / TITLE Sentences / ARTICLE Authorized Dispositions of Offenders
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Penal Law § 60.02 (2026)

Authorized disposition; youthful offender

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 60.02 Authorized disposition; youthful offender.
  When a person is to be sentenced upon a youthful offender finding, the
court must impose a sentence as follows:
  (1) If the sentence is to be imposed upon a youthful offender finding
which has been substituted for a conviction of an offense other than a
felony, the court must impose a sentence authorized for the offense for
which the youthful offender finding was substituted, except that if the
youthful offender finding was entered pursuant to paragraph (b) of
subdivision one of section 720.20 of the criminal procedure law, the
court must not impose a definite or intermittent sentence of
imprisonment with a term of more than six months; or
  (2) If the sentence is to be imposed upon a youthful offender finding
which has been substituted for a conviction for any felony, the court
must impose a sentence authorized to be imposed upon a person convicted
of a class E felony provided, however, that the court must not impose a
sentence of conditional discharge or unconditional discharge if the
youthful offender finding was substituted for a conviction of a felony
defined in article two hundred twenty of this chapter.
  (4) Notwithstanding any other provision of law in this section, if the
sentence is to be imposed upon a youthful offender finding which has
been substituted for a conviction of prostitution or loitering for the
purposes of prostitution provided that the person does not stand charged
with loitering for the purpose of patronizing a prostitute, and such
offense occurred when the person was sixteen or seventeen years of age,
the court must impose a sentence authorized to be imposed upon a person
convicted of a violation as defined in subdivision three of section
10.00 of the penal law and where the court imposes a revocable sentence
authorized for a violation may order any of the specialized services
enumerated in title eight-A of article six of the social services law or
other appropriate services made available to persons in need of
supervision in accordance with article seven of the family court act.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 76 cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: People v. Rudolph, 997 N.E.2d 457 (NY 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Rudolph, 997 N.E.2d 457 (NY 2013). · cites it 2× “20 [1] [a]; [3]; Penal Law §§ 60.02 [2]; 70.00 [2] [e]), the sealing of records *501 relating to the prosecution, and the avoidance of disabilities that might otherwise result from a conviction, including disqualification from public office and public employment (CPL 720.”
People v. Francis, 94 N.E.3d 882 (2018). “We are unpersuaded by this reading of the statutory language, as defendant fails to account for the fact that a YO adjudication is premised on a youth's commission of a crime.”
The People v. William Middlebrooks / The People v. Fabrice Lowe, 35 N.E.3d 464 (NY 2015). · cites it 2× “If the court had found Lowe to be an eligible youth and then further determined that he should be granted youthful offender treatment, the harshest sentence the court could have imposed was an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 1a to 4 years, a lesser sentence than the…”
People v. Teri W., 97 N.E.3d 386 (2018). · cites it 4× “00 in turn indicates that sentences of probation should be considered in accordance with "the nature and circumstances of the crime and ... the history, character and condition of the defendant," and the statute prescribes *388 specific **779 probationary terms according to a…”
People v. Dawn Maria C., 490 N.E.2d 530 (NY 1986). “20 [3]; Penal Law § 60.02 [2]). Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur; Judge Hancock, Jr.”
People v. Marquis A., 145 A.D.3d 61 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). “” The permissible prison sentence for a person convicted of an undesignated class E felony is an indeterminate sentence with a minimum term of one year and a maximum term of four years (see Penal Law § 70.”
People v. Strong, 2017 NY Slip Op 5876 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). · cites it 2× “, 174 AD2d 865, 867 [1991]; People v Cruickshank , 105 AD2d at 335-336 ) by vacating the convictions, adjudicating defendant to be a youthful offender and, in the interest of judicial economy, sentencing him to a prison term of 1 to 4 years, rather than remitting for sentencing…”
People v. Calderon, 588 N.E.2d 61 (NY 1992). · cites it 2× “20 [3]; Penal Law §§ 60.02, 70.00 [2] [e]). *64 Subsequently, on January 19, 1990, the sentencing court reconvened for the purpose of "resentencing” defendant in light of its realization that the sentence imposed was incompatible with a youthful offender adjudication.”
United States v. Conca, 635 F.3d 55 (2d Cir. 2011). “” N.Y. Penal Law § 60.02 (2) (McKinney 2009).”
People v. Shrubsall, 167 A.D.2d 929 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990). “In summary, weighing all the appropriate factors, we choose to exercise our discretion to vacate the sentence, adjudicate defendant a youthful offender, and sentence him to serve an indeterminate term of 1!/S to 4 years (see, Penal Law § 60.02 [2]; People v Smith, 134 AD2d 938 ).”
People v. Jorge N.T., 70 A.D.3d 1456 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). “, 21 AD3d 904, 905 [2005]; see Penal Law § 60.02 [2]; § 70.00 [2] [e]). We therefore modify the adjudication accordingly.”
United States v. Terrance Matthews, 205 F.3d 544 (2d Cir. 2000). “When a defendant receives a youthful offender adjudication in New York, his conviction is “deemed vacated and replaced by a youthful offender finding,” and the court imposes a youthful offender sentence pursuant to N.Y. Penal Law § 60.02 (McKinney 1998). See N.”
Show all 76 citing cases →
— N.Y. Penal Law § 60.02(2) — 2 cases
People v. Teri W., 97 N.E.3d 386 (2018). “00 in turn indicates that sentences of probation should be considered in accordance with "the nature and circumstances of the crime and ... the history, character and condition of the defendant," and the statute prescribes *388 specific **779 probationary terms according to a…”
People v. Steele, 2025 NY Slip Op 04494 (N.Y. App. Div. 2025).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.