| People v Hoti |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 01249 [12 NY3d 742] |
| February 19, 2009 |
| Court of Appeals |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| As corrected through Wednesday, April 29, 2009 |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Bajro Hoti, Appellant. |
Decided February 19, 2009
People v Hoti, 52 AD3d 211, affirmed.
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Center for Appellate Litigation, New York City (Mark W. Zeno of counsel), for appellant.
Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York City (Richard Nahas of counsel), for respondent.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), 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 12 NY3d 45 [2009] [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]).
Concur: Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones. Taking no part: Chief Judge Lippman.