People v. Goldenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Goldenberg

17 A.D.3d 433, 792 N.Y.S.2d 354, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3761

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 11, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.3d 433 (People v. Goldenberg) 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. Goldenberg, 17 A.D.3d 433, 792 N.Y.S.2d 354, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3761 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chambers, J.), dated March 25, 2004, which, pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C, adjudicated him a level three sex offender.

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

The Supreme Court’s designation of the defendant as a level three sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act was properly made upon findings of fact and conclusions of law. The determination was based upon the recommendation of Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders and was supported by clear and convincing evidence (see People v Dong V. Dao, 9 AD3d 401 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 609 [2004]; People v Girup, 9 AD3d 913 [2004]; People v Delmarle, 2 AD3d 1446, 1447 [2003]). H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Chambers, J.), dated March 25, 2004, which, pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C, adjudicated him a level three sex offender.

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

The Supreme Court’s designation of the defendant as a level three sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act was properly made upon findings of fact and conclusions of law. The determination was based upon the recommendation of Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders and was supported by clear and convincing evidence (see People v Dong V. Dao, 9 AD3d 401 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 609 [2004]; People v Girup, 9 AD3d 913 [2004]; People v Delmarle, 2 AD3d 1446, 1447 [2003]). H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Goldstein and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.3d 433, 792 N.Y.S.2d 354, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3761, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-goldenberg-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack