People v. Harrison

95 A.D.3d 686, 943 N.Y.S.2d 891
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Harrison. Read the opinion of the Court — 74 A.D.3d 688

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ruth Pickholz, J.), entered on or about December 17, 2009, 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 record supports the assessment of points for defendant’s history of drug abuse (see e.g. People v Wilkens, 33 AD3d 399 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 801 [2007]). In any event, regardless of whether defendant’s correct point score is 95 or 80, there is no basis for a discretionary downward departure to level one (see People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 568 n 2 [2009]; People v Johnson, 11 NY3d 416, 421 [2008]). The seriousness of the underlying crime outweighs the mitigating factors asserted by defendant, which were adequately taken into account by the [687]*687risk assessment instrument (see e.g. People v Hansford, 67 AD3d 496 [2009]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

People v. Harrison, 95 A.D.3d 686, 943 N.Y.S.2d 891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

95 A.D.3d 686 (People v. Harrison) — 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. Johnson
900 N.E.2d 930 (New York Court of Appeals, 2008)
People v. Hansford
67 A.D.3d 496 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)