People v. Avalo

2020 NY Slip Op 4599, 127 N.Y.S.3d 337, 186 A.D.3d 754
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedAugust 19, 2020
Docket2019-02695
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 4599 (People v. Avalo) 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. Avalo, 2020 NY Slip Op 4599, 127 N.Y.S.3d 337, 186 A.D.3d 754 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

People v Avalo (2020 NY Slip Op 04599)
People v Avalo
2020 NY Slip Op 04599
Decided on August 19, 2020
Appellate Division, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on August 19, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
RUTH C. BALKIN
LEONARD B. AUSTIN
COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.

2019-02695

[*1]People of State of New York, respondent,

v

Miguel Avalo, appellant. Marianne Karas, Thornwood, NY, for appellant.


Madeline Singas, District Attorney, Mineola, NY (Rebecca L. Abensur and Sarah Nadeau-Balducci of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Robert A. McDonald, J.), dated January 28, 2018, which, after a hearing, designated him a level one sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court, in designating him a level one sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (see Correction Law art 6-C; hereinafter SORA), improperly assessed him 10 points under risk factor 15 is unpreserved for appellate review, since he did not object to the assessment of these points at the SORA hearing (see People v Cox, 173 AD3d 783, 783). In any event, the issue of whether the defendant might have earned a lower numerical score under the Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary (2006) was academic, as the defendant would inevitably have remained at level one regardless of how low his numerical score might have been (see People v Belter, 84 AD3d 905, 906).

DILLON, J.P., BALKIN, AUSTIN and DUFFY, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Mendez
2022 NY Slip Op 04311 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
People v. Gonzalez
2021 NY Slip Op 03340 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Leung
2021 NY Slip Op 08207 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Ramroop
2020 NY Slip Op 04883 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 4599, 127 N.Y.S.3d 337, 186 A.D.3d 754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-avalo-nyappdiv-2020.