People v. Frith

131 A.D.3d 521, 14 N.Y.S.3d 710
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 12, 2015·No. 2011-03305·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sullivan, J.), dated April 1, 2011, which, after a hearing, designated him a level three 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, the Supreme Court properly designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (hereinafter SORA) (see Correction Law art 6-C). The case summary prepared by the Board of Examiners, as well as the remaining documentation presented by the People at the SORA hearing, constituted “reliable hearsay,” and provided a sufficient basis for the assessment of the points challenged by him on the instant appeal (Correction Law § 168-n [3]; see People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 573 [2009]; People v Williams, 95 AD3d 1093, 1094 [2012]).

Rivera, J.P., Leventhal, Roman and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Frith, 131 A.D.3d 521, 14 N.Y.S.3d 710 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

131 A.D.3d 521 (People v. Frith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Mingo
910 N.E.2d 983 (New York Court of Appeals, 2009)
People v. Williams
95 A.D.3d 1093 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)