People v Hough

Holding The court struck probation conditions 10, 15, 22, 23, and 24 because they were not reasonably related to the defendant’s rehabilitation, such as imposing fees or requiring substance abuse testing without evidence of related offenses. The court affirmed the conviction and sentence otherwise, declining to review unpreserved constitutional and statutory challenges to other conditions.

The court’s words

the imposition of the $250 sum, comprising the mandatory surcharge, crime victim's assistance fees, and DNA fees, as a condition of defendant's probation will not assist in ensuring he leads a law-abiding life

2026 NY Slip Op 06534, at the official text

there is no evidence that defendant's offense involved any drugs or alcohol, [and] the Department of Probation did not conclude that defendant required substance abuse or related treatment

2026 NY Slip Op 06534, at the official text

condition 24, requiring defendant to refrain from wearing or displaying gang paraphernalia and having any association with a gang or its members is not reasonably related to his rehabilitation

2026 NY Slip Op 06534, at the official text