People v. Callendar
This text of 127 A.D.3d 1153 (People v. Callendar) 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.
Opinion
Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (DiMango, J.), dated March 23, 2012, which, after a hearing, adjudicated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was properly assessed points for risk factor 14 (see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 17 [2006] [hereinafter the Guidelines]). The People demonstrated, by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant’s release *1154 from State custody was not conditioned upon any course of supervision (see People v McNeil, 116 AD3d 1018, 1018 [2014]; People v Rouff, 49 AD3d 517, 517 [2008]; cf. People v Lewis, 37 AD3d 689, 690 [2007]). Furthermore, contrary to the defendant’s contention, the Supreme Court lacked the discretion to downwardly depart from the presumptive risk level, since the defendant failed to identify a mitigating factor not otherwise adequately taken into account by the Guidelines (see People v Sooknanan, 119 AD3d 540, 540 [2014]; People v Reede, 113 AD3d 663, 664 [2014]; People v Martinez, 104 AD3d 924, 925 [2013] ).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
127 A.D.3d 1153, 5 N.Y.S.3d 907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-callendar-nyappdiv-2015.