People v. Hosear

134 A.D.3d 633, 21 N.Y.S.3d 611
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 29, 2015
Docket16453 3866/11
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 134 A.D.3d 633 (People v. Hosear) 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. Hosear, 134 A.D.3d 633, 21 N.Y.S.3d 611 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Thomas Farber, J.), entered on or about March 7, 2014, which adjudicated defendant a level two sexually violent predicate sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of remanding for a further hearing on defendant’s request for a downward departure, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

The court properly assessed defendant 10 points under the risk factor for forcible compulsion. Defendant, taking advantage of a crowded subway car, pressed up against a trapped victim, moved his penis against her buttocks, breathed heavily and made loud noises over the course of several minutes, in a manner that caused her to be aware that she was being sexually assaulted and too scared to say anything. Although there was insufficient evidence of forcible compulsion by physical force (see People v Mack, 18 NY3d 929 [2012]), the evidence was sufficient to show forcible compulsion by an implied threat that placed the victim in fear of physical injury.

However, defendant proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, mitigating circumstances related to his debilitating medical condition (see People v Stevens, 55 AD3d 892 [2d Dept 2008]). We remand the matter for a further hearing with respect to his current medical condition and future prognosis, given the concern that defendant could recover his capability of reoffending. Concur — Tom, J.R, Renwick, Saxe and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Aponte
2024 NY Slip Op 06546 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Greene (Curtis)
73 Misc. 3d 138(A) (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Herbert
2020 NY Slip Op 05240 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Sanchez
2020 NY Slip Op 04796 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Sudderth
2019 NY Slip Op 2989 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
134 A.D.3d 633, 21 N.Y.S.3d 611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hosear-nyappdiv-2015.