People v. Andrade

124 A.D.3d 533, 1 N.Y.S.3d 107
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 26, 2015
Docket14038 3942/06
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 124 A.D.3d 533 (People v. Andrade) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Andrade, 124 A.D.3d 533, 1 N.Y.S.3d 107 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel P FitzGerald, J.), entered on or about December 14, 2012, which adjudicated defendant a level two sexually violent offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The People met their burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, risk factors bearing a sufficient total point score to support a level two sex offender adjudication. Initially, we note that defendant concedes that 70 points were correctly assessed. Therefore, the addition of any one of the three point assessments contested on appeal would be sufficient to qualify defendant as a level two offender.

The court properly assessed 10 points for use of violence, because the victim’s grand jury testimony clearly established that, during one of numerous incidents of sexual misconduct, defendant ignored her plea for him to stop and restrained her by holding her down by her wrists. The court properly assessed 30 points for the victim’s age, because the victim distinctly recalled that the first sexual offense occurred on a particular Christmas Day when she was under 11 years old. The court properly assessed 15 points for alcohol abuse, because the victim testified that defendant was drunk at the time of two specific sexual offenses.

The court properly exercised its discretion when it declined to grant a downward departure (see People v Gillotti, 23 NY3d 841 [2014]). We do not find any overassessment of points. There were no mitigating factors that were not adequately taken into account by the guidelines, and the record does not establish any basis for a downward departure.

Concur — Tom, J.P., Acosta, Saxe, Moskowitz and Feinman, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Pressley
2017 NY Slip Op 7226 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
124 A.D.3d 533, 1 N.Y.S.3d 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-andrade-nyappdiv-2015.