People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 836 (1995)
When a plea agreement results in an illegal sentence, either because the agreed-upon sentence or the sentence actually imposed is not authorized by law, the sentence must be reversed, and both parties must be given the opportunity to withdraw from the plea agreement.
Summary
Defendant Ford was arrested at Kennedy Airport with cocaine and marijuana. She pleaded guilty via an Alford plea to attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance, with the prosecution recommending a sentence of four years to life imprisonment, based on the mistaken belief it was a class A-II felony. The trial court, however, sentenced her to lifetime probation, citing her cooperation and concerns about cruel and unusual punishment. The Appellate Division reversed, finding neither the agreed nor imposed sentences legal for a class A-I felony, and allowed either party to withdraw the plea. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that illegal sentences render plea agreements voidable by either party.
Facts
Defendant Ford arrived at Kennedy Airport from Jamaica and was found to be in possession of 14 ounces of cocaine and over two pounds of marijuana during a customs inspection of her carry-on baggage. She was subsequently indicted for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree and criminal possession of marijuana in the second degree.
Procedural History
The defendant pleaded guilty to attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree pursuant to an Alford plea. The Supreme Court sentenced her to lifetime probation, deviating from the prosecution’s recommended sentence. The Appellate Division reversed the sentence and remitted the case for resentencing, allowing either party to withdraw from the plea agreement. The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal and affirmed the Appellate Division’s order.
Issue(s)
Whether a sentence imposed pursuant to a plea agreement, which is either the agreed-upon sentence or the sentence actually imposed, is not authorized by law for the crime of which the defendant was convicted, the Appellate Division properly ruled that the sentence must be reversed and the case remitted for resentencing with the opportunity for both parties to withdraw from the plea agreement.
Holding
Yes, because neither the sentence pursuant to the plea agreement nor the sentence actually imposed was authorized by law for the crime of which defendant was convicted, the Appellate Division properly ruled that the sentence must be reversed and the case remitted for resentencing with the opportunity for both parties to withdraw from the plea agreement.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals based its decision on the established principle that a sentence not authorized by law is invalid. Because the defendant pleaded guilty to a class A-I felony, neither the agreed-upon sentence of four years to life (appropriate for a class A-II felony) nor the imposed sentence of lifetime probation was legally permissible. The court relied on People v. Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 307-308, which provides that when a plea agreement is flawed due to an illegal sentence, both the prosecution and the defendant have the right to withdraw from the agreement and return to their original positions. The court emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory sentencing guidelines and ensuring that plea agreements result in lawful dispositions. The court stated: “Because neither the sentence pursuant to the plea agreement nor the sentence actually imposed was authorized by law for the crime of which defendant was convicted, the Appellate Division properly ruled that the sentence must be reversed and the case remitted for resentencing with the opportunity for both parties to withdraw from the plea agreement”.