DMV Announces Readiness to Implement New Regulation on Youthful Offender Adjudications

A public notice from the NYS Department of Motor Vehicles published on p. 92 of the July 2, 2025, issue of the State Register announced that the DMV’s systems are now ready to implement the Nov. 6, 2024, amendment to 15 NYCRR 136.5(a)(1)(i).

Part 136 governs “licensing or relicensing after revocation action” and section 136.5 addresses applications for re-licensing for “applicants with multiple alcohol- or drug-related driving convictions or incidents and for applicants with an alcohol-related conviction related to a fatal accident.” The amended version of 136.5(a)(1)(i) reads:

(a) For the purposes of this section:

(1) Alcohol- or drug-related driving conviction or incident means any of the following, not arising out of the same incident:

(i) (i) a conviction or a youthful offender adjudication of a violation of section 1192 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law or an out-of-state conviction for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs;

As discussed in the Dec. 10, 2024 edition of News Picks, the DMV adopted amendments to its rules governing the point system and relicensing after revocation. The adoption included the following language: “The proposed regulations will not be enforceable until the thirtieth day following publication in the State Register of notice to the public that the Commissioner has determined that the Department's systems are prepared to implement the proposed regulatory changes.” However, the Public Notice also states: “The above regulatory amendment to the Commissioner’s regulations merely conform the regulations to the practice of the Department of Motor Vehicles.” Does this mean that the DMV has already been considering YO adjudications to be equivalent to convictions before the regulatory amendment was adopted in November?

In addition to the fact that the DMV arguably acted outside of its regulatory authority by amending the regulation to treat YO adjudications as equivalent to convictions for re-licensing applications, and before the DMV asserted that the regulatory amendment was adopted “merely to conform” to its practice, there were already significant questions about the scope of its application of this amendment and the other regulatory changes.

Given the vague language in the amendments and the inconsistent statements made by the DMV, it is incredibly challenging for defenders to know how to counsel clients who have VTL 1192 cases, VTL 511 cases, or traffic tickets that will have increased point values. In the meantime, it is important to advise clients who receive a new YO adjudication for a VTL 1192 violation of this change as it could significantly impact a client’s right to re-licensure after revocation in the future.  

Note: The July 2nd DMV notice is limited to the YO part of the regulations; the DMV has not yet published a public notice regarding readiness to implement the remaining regulatory changes. But, as with the YO adjudications, the questions regarding the interpretation of implementation and enforcement remain.

If the DMV has provided you with any information about how it is interpreting the amendment or other amendments adopted in November, or if you are aware of cases where the DMV denied re-licensing due to a YO adjudication, please reach out to the Backup Center at info@nysda.org or 518-465-3524.

NYSDA Launches Artificial Intelligence Starter Guide

Our Discovery and Forensic Support Unit has assembled some resources and frequently asked questions about artificial intelligence in its new resource: “Artificial Intelligence Starter Guide.” The Starter Guide can be found here. If you have any questions about this resource or other issues related to discovery, forensics, or expert witnesses, or if you need assistance with other issues related to criminal and family court cases, please contact the Public Defense Backup Center for help: info@nysda.org, Contact Form, or 518-465-3524.

Items for Public Comment Posted by OCA; Electronic Appearances Rule in Effect

Among several new items posted for public comment on the Unified Court System website (here) are: 1) a proposed new rule regulating the use of electronic appearances during criminal proceedings; 2) a proposed rule change to relax some of the strict time requirements for when a child support contempt proceeding must be calendared and adjudicated; and 3) a proposal to amend various provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct relating to conflicts of interest and other issues.

Those wishing to comment on the proposed rule change can email rulecomments@nycourts.gov or write to: David Nocenti, Esq., Counsel, Office of Court Administration, 25 Beaver Street, 10th Fl., New York, New York, 10004. Comments must be received no later than Friday, August 8, 2025.

Electronic Appearances in Criminal Matters

The proposed rule regarding electronic appearances in criminal matters stems from a new statute, CPL article 182, passed as part of the state budget and effective July 8, 2025. The old article 182 was repealed. More information about the law was included in the May 14th issue of News Picks.

According to the OCA announcement, the new CPL article 182 “modernizes and expands the court system’s authority to utilize virtual appearances during criminal proceedings.” It “will allow for the use of virtual appearances at evidentiary hearings, pleas, and sentencings statewide, but only with the consent of the defendant after conferral with their attorney or legal advisor.”

One new provision, CPL 182.30, provides that the “chief administrator of the courts shall adopt rules to regulate the conduct of electronic appearances pursuant to this article” to provide, among other things, appropriate, limited electronic access for “crime victims and their families, family members of defendants, the media and other members of the public” and “ensure that any system for arraignments provides a full and fair opportunity for any defendant, without prejudice, to choose to have an arraignment conducted with the defendant physically present ….” Other provisions of note include a bar on electronic appearances where the “defendant in a proceeding is under the age of 18” (CPL 182.20[7]) and “[n]othing in this article shall be construed as limiting a court’s authority to excuse a defendant’s appearance, either where they would be physically present or appearing by electronic means, during a proceeding.” (CPL 182.20[8]).

The proposed rule, Rule 200.9-a, took effect on an interim basis on July 8th while public comment is sought. The details of the detailed proposed rule can be seen here. The Office of Indigent Legal Services is expected to issue a statement regarding the new CPL article 182 at a future date.

Defenders and others who comment are encouraged to share their comments with NYSDA, which has long advocated for clients’ rights and fairness as to virtual/remote proceedings.

Proposed Child Support Rule Change

The proposal would amend rule 205.43 of the Uniform Rules of the Family Court. According to the memo from OCA counsel, the proposal is based on a recommendation from the Family Court Advisory and Rules Committee (FCARC). “FCARC believes that the current deadlines are unduly strict and result in adverse consequences for other Family Court proceedings and for Family Court litigants.” In particular, FCARC notes that: “the deadlines were established in 2003 in order to address unwarranted delays in adjudicating child support violation petitions; since that time, the Family Courts have made great strides in processing the petitions on an expeditious basis…” The proposed amendments and memo from FCARC can be found here.

Proposed Amendments to Rules of Professional Conduct, Including Conflicts of Interest

Comments are sought on a proposal, recommended by the New York State Bar Association, to amend several rules in the Rules of Professional Conduct relating to conflicts of interest and other issues. The changes and State Bar explanation for them are attached to the announcement, found here.

E-Filing Program Pilot Launches in Brooklyn Supreme Court – Criminal Term

In early June, Chief Administrative Judge Joseph Zayas authorized a pilot program for electronic filing in Kings County Supreme Court – Criminal Term. The administrative order, issued pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law 10.40(2), lays out the rules of the program.

Reversible Error to Dismiss Custody Petition When Putative Father Alleges Paternity

In Matter of Kevin C. v Tricia J. (2025 NY Slip Op 03324 [6/4/2025]), the Second Department reinstated a father’s custody petition after finding the lower court committed reversible error in dismissing the petition because the petitioner was not adjudicated to be the father until after the custody proceeding was commenced. “Pursuant to Domestic Relations Law § 70, parents have standing to seek custody of … their children. Here, the custody petition sufficiently alleged that the petitioner was the biological father of the child. The mother's affidavits did not expressly deny the petitioner's paternity .…Moreover … it is undisputed that the petitioner was adjudicated to be the child's biological father before, or at the same time that, the court granted that branch of the mother's motion which was to dismiss the custody petition. Accordingly, the court erred in determining that the petitioner did not have standing to file the custody petition because he had not been adjudicated the biological father of the child before the custody petition was filed.” [Citation and internal quotation marks omitted.]

Termination of Parental Rights Reversed

In a victory against child protective services, a mother was successful in appealing an order finding that she permanently neglected her child and terminating her parental rights. In Matter of Makari A.H. (2025 NY Slip Op 03569 [6/11/2025]), the Second Department found that the agency failed to meet its statutory burden of first proving that the mother failed to maintain contact with the child or plan for his future, which are required by Social Services Law 384-b, before the court could find permanent neglect and terminate her parental rights. According to the decision, “‘[t]he petitioner acknowledged the mother and child had a ‘close bond’ and that he appeared to be ‘well cared for’ during visits with the mother. Further, after the child was removed from the mother's care, the mother consistently visited the child when she was allowed to do so and substantially complied with all terms set forth by the petitioner.” [Citations omitted.] The petition against the mother was denied, and the case was dismissed.

Family defenders are strongly encouraged to read the full decision, as it offers an excellent tutorial on the law regarding TPRs and possible defenses. Additionally, the NYLJ recently featured an article on “Termination of Parental Rights and Psychologist Testimony,” which defenders may find informative in strategizing defenses for these types of cases. NYSDA has hosted several CLE programs on these topics. Those with questions are encouraged to contact our Family Court Staff Attorney, Kim Bode, at kbode@nysda.org.

Public Surveillance Companies as One-Stop Shopping for Your Local Police Departments

According to a recent TechDirt article, companies like Axon, Flock Safety, SoundThinking (AKA ShotSpotter), and Palantir are expanding their businesses to be a one-stop-shop for police departments and city surveillance needs: each encouraging police and municipalities to buy their full suites of products. Much like consumer brands outside of the criminal legal system, these companies convince their customers that buying products à la carte is more costly than bundling. Once customers begin using one or more of these all-seeing products, usually in multi-year subscriptions, it becomes difficult to switch to a new brand due not only to contract terms but also the nature of the data sharing and integrated systems themselves. 

Selected Rundown: Flock Safety, for example, has offered New York police departments and sheriffs’ offices assistance to help find funding for its products with grant applications and waivers. Last year, Axon acquired Fusus, a “real-time crime center,” which Axon claims is currently operational in over 250 policing agencies. Phone company, Motorola, is now in on the surveillance game with 911 services, in-car cameras, drones, facial recognition tech, BWCs, radio, ALPRs, crime mapping, records management, and integrative software. Some of its AI-enhanced video features include tracking individuals across multiple cameras.

All of these companies are pushing toward “‘data integration’ and artificial intelligence” within their systems. TechDirt contributor, Beryl Lipton, said it best when she wrote, “The next time you come across BWCs or another piece of tech on your city council’s agenda or police department’s budget, take a closer look to see what other strings and surveillance tools might be attached. You are not just looking at one line item on the sheet—it’s probably an ongoing subscription to a whole package of equipment designed to challenge your privacy, and no sort of discount makes that a price worth paying.” See the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) Atlas of Surveillance and Street Level Surveillance for information about your local agencies’ tools.

Flock Asserts It Will Not Use Hacked Data in Its Nova People Search Tool

In our last News Picks From NYSDA Staff we reported that “Surveillance Company, Flock [is] Seeking to Become Even More Invasive.” While this is still true, 404 Media recently reported that Flock decided not to use hacked data in its people search tool. Flock Safety (the company’s full name) differentiates itself from other surveillance brands because it “allows its customers to share data with a huge network of police.” According to the article, “[t]he move comes after internal pressure and 404 Media’s reporting.” Flock’s public announcement can be found here.

July Is BIPOC Mental Health Month

Mental Health America (MHA) has announced that July is Bebe Moore Campbell National Minority Mental Health Awareness Month, also referred to as BIPOC Mental Health Month. Among materials available from MHA is a reading list of both fiction and nonfiction works centering communities of African, Arab, Asian and Pacific Islander, Indigenous American, Latine/Hispanic, and Multiracial descent.

Racial Justice Act: An Effort, not a Panacea

The Indigent Defense Research Association (IDRA) hosted a presentation on “Fighting Bias with Data: Lessons from California’s Racial Justice Act” at its online June monthly meeting. A video of the presentation, with transcription, is available. The summary notes that “[a]fter more than four years of RJA litigation, defense counsel have achieved a host of successes but also a number of setbacks.” Difficulties in obtaining data, finding experts to analyze the data, convincing courts that bias has been shown, etc. were described. One poignant comment was that some clients were very moved even if the RJA claim made on their behalf lost, because they were “having their truth told in the … courtroom ….[,] being able to talk about the racism and the … bias that” they faced in the criminal legal system. The flip side was that some clients had to hear very hurtful things being said by the opposition. The presentation included a brief discussion of how other states might address bias in their systems, with the caution that “at least in California it’s not a panacea….” Information about California RJA cases is provided on the Central California Appellate Program website.

As noted in the March 31st edition of News Picks discussion of some victories, the California RJA “was intended as a ‘countermeasure’ to” the U.S. Supreme Court 1987 decision in McCleskey v Kemp. An earlier effort to counter McCleskey, the North Carolina RJA, was passed in 2009 but repealed in 2013; as noted in the March 11th edition of News Picks, a conviction that violated the act prior to repeal was overturned in February.

Association News

NYSDA’s 58th Annual Meeting & Conference: Awards Announced

We look forward to seeing you at the Saratoga City Center and Saratoga Hilton from July 27th to 29th! Your conference registration includes the Awards Luncheon on Monday at which we will be recognizing the following award recipients:

• Kevin M. Andersen Memorial Award: Josette D. Colon, Schulyer County Public Defender
• Wilfred R. O’Connor Award: Kent V. Moston, Legal Training Director, Legal Aid Society of Suffolk County
• Jonathan E. Gradess Service of Justice Award: Hon. Latrice M. Walker, NYS Assemblymember

Upcoming Training; More Fall Programs Coming Soon

August 15, 2025: 9th Annual Master Class in DWI Defense, Finger Lakes Community College

This all-day, in-person training is co-presented by the National College for DUI Defense and the Ontario County Public Defender’s Office. For more information and to register, click here.

September 23, 2025, 1:00 – 2:30 pm: Administering Justice: Utilizing New York's

Commission on Prosecutorial Conduct in Defense Practice

This free Zoom webinar will be presented by Peter Santina, Managing Attorney, Prosecutorial Accountability Project, Civil Rights Corps, and Nicole Smith Futrell, Professor of Law & Faculty Director, Human & Civil Rights Program, CUNY School of Law. For more information and to register, click here.

NYSDA Staff Updates

Veterans Defense Program

We are pleased to announce that Yairelis Burgos, Ph.D., has joined our Veterans Defense Program as a Mitigation Specialist. Prior to joining the VDP team, Dr. Burgos served in the United States Army from 2008-2022, retiring as a Staff Sergeant. She is a combat veteran who proudly served in Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF XII-XIII). With over 15 years of combined military, federal, and civilian experience, she is a dedicated advocate for justice-involved veterans and has extensive first-hand knowledge of military culture and challenges that servicemembers and veterans encounter. Dr. Burgos has served in a variety of roles including as a Forensic Social Worker, Paralegal Specialist, and Veteran Mitigation Specialist. She brings deep expertise in military culture and trauma-informed assistance. She has a B.S. in Justice Studies, an M.S.W., and a Ph.D. in Criminal Justice, where she conducted original research and authored a dissertation titled “The Challenges of Reentry and Recidivism Among Justice-Involved Veterans.” Welcome, Yairelis!

Public Defense Case Management System Team

We are excited to share the news that Dandre Wheeler has been appointed Director of the Public Defense Case Management System (PDCMS). Dandre has been a member of the PDCMS team for close to 10 years, and he was promoted to Interim Director in December 2024, as we prepared for the retirement of our longtime PDCMS Director Darlene Dollard. We wish Darlene all the best in her retirement! And we are thrilled to have Dandre step into the Director position as we are developing a new version of PDCMSCloud. Congratulations, Dandre!

In addition to Dandre’s promotion, we are happy to share news about other members of the PDCMS Team: Asaph Ko has been promoted to Senior Information Systems Specialist, and Oneil McDonald has moved into the newly created position of PDCMS Software Testing and Training Specialist. Congratulations, Asaph and Oneil! We expect to be adding other staff to the PDCMS team in the near future.

NYSDA Observed Juneteenth

Since 2021, NYSDA’s offices have closed for observance of the Juneteenth holiday. It celebrates the official end of slavery in the United States and provides a time for consider the effects of slavery that taint our legal and social institutions to this day. As Executive Director Susan C. Bryant said in 2021, “NYSDA’s offices will be closed … to allow staff the opportunity to observe Juneteenth and celebrate freedom and the history, achievements, and perseverance of African Americans and reflect on the ongoing, systemic racism and injustice in our society.” This year’s observance, on June 19th, provided a frighteningly opportune time for such reflection.

NYSDA remains committed to exposing and ending the overt racism and implicit biases that traumatize and re-traumatize entire communities. The 2025 Basic Trial Skills Program, completed on June 13th, included opportunities for attending defenders to learn about bias and trauma, including that which emanates from continuing racism.