The People v. Bajro Hoti
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
================================================================= This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------No. 75 SSM 4 The People &c., Respondent, v. Bajro Hoti, Appellant. Submitted by Mark W. Zeno, for appellant. Submitted by Richard Nahas, for respondent. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed. The mandatory surcharge, crime victim assistance fee, and DNA databank fee are not components of a defendant's sentence (see People v Guerrero [decided today]). Accordingly, the court's failure to pronounce the surcharge and fees prior to the entry of defendant's plea did not deprive the defendant of the opportunity to knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently choose among alternative courses of action (cf. People v Catu, 4 NY3d 242, 245 [2005]). Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur. Chief Judge Lippman took no part. Decided February 19, 2009
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
