In People v. Huggins (179 Misc 2d 636 [Greene County Ct 1999]), the court concluded that the mechanism for deferral set forth in Penal Law 60.35 (8) and CPL 420.40 (2) is not available for persons sentenced to a term of confinement. The Huggins court nevertheless granted the deferral, interpreting Penal Law 60.30, applicable to those incarcerated, as providing discretionary authority for the court to defer the mandatory surcharge to a definite future date in the case of incarcerated individuals. The court in Huggins did not address the extent to which an inmate is required to establish unreasonable hardship or indigence. In People v. Parker (183 Misc 2d 787 [Sup Ct, Kings County 2000]), the court denied the inmate's application for deferral, holding that he had not demonstrated unreasonable hardship to himself or established that he was in any way responsible for the support of any immediate family member who has been adversely affected by the deductions from his jail earnings. The court did not address the failure of the statute to specify a procedure for seeking deferral by incarcerated individuals.