People v. Holt

90 A.D.3d 1678, 935 N.Y.2d 519
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Holt. Read the opinion of the Court — 93 A.D.3d 1304

Opinion

Memorandum:

Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he was entitled to a downward departure from his presumptive risk level (see People v Clark, 66 AD3d 1366 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 713 [2009]; People v Ratcliff, 53 AD3d 1110 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 708 [2008]). In any event, that contention lacks merit “inasmuch as defendant failed to present clear and convincing evidence of special circumstances justifying a downward departure” (People v McDaniel, 27 AD3d 1158, 1159 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 703 [2006]). Present — Smith, J.E, Fahey, Garni, Sconiers and Gorski, JJ.

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

People v. Holt, 90 A.D.3d 1678, 935 N.Y.2d 519 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

90 A.D.3d 1678 (People v. Holt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. McDaniel
27 A.D.3d 1158 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
People v. Ratcliff
53 A.D.3d 1110 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
People v. Clark
66 A.D.3d 1366 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)