People v. Hingel
This text of 50 A.D.3d 501 (People v. Hingel) 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
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles H. Solomon, J.), entered on or about March 10, 2006, which adjudicated defendant a level two sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
We reject defendant’s challenges to the choice of risk factors made by the Legislature and the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders (see People v Bligen, 33 AD3d 489 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 803 [2007]; People v Joe, 26 AD3d 300 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 703 [2006]). In addition, defendant did not establish any special circumstances warranting a downward departure from [502]*502his presumptive risk level (see People v Guaman, 8 AD3d 545 [2004]). Concur—Lippman, EJ., Friedman, Sweeny and Moskowitz, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
50 A.D.3d 501, 854 N.Y.S.2d 892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hingel-nyappdiv-2008.