People v. Lozada

2021 NY Slip Op 05174, 152 N.Y.S.3d 292, 197 A.D.3d 1073
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 30, 2021
DocketInd No. 3504/13 Appeal No. 14240 Case No. 2015-2434
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 2021 NY Slip Op 05174 (People v. Lozada) 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. Lozada, 2021 NY Slip Op 05174, 152 N.Y.S.3d 292, 197 A.D.3d 1073 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2021).

Opinion

People v Lozada (2021 NY Slip Op 05174)
People v Lozada
2021 NY Slip Op 05174
Decided on September 30, 2021
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided and Entered: September 30, 2021
Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Kern, Oing, Rodriguez, Higgitt, JJ.

Ind No. 3504/13 Appeal No. 14240 Case No. 2015-2434

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Jose Lozada, Defendant-Appellant.


Janet E. Sabel, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Ellen Dille of counsel), for appellant.

Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Robert L. Myers of counsel), for respondent.



Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Troy K. Webber, J.), entered on or about January 15, 2015, which adjudicated defendant a level three sexually violent predicate sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court's assessment of 10 points under the risk factor for failure to accept responsibility was supported by clear and convincing evidence (see e.g. People v Kennedy, 160 AD3d 671 [2d Dept 2018], lv denied 31 NY3d 913 [2018]). Although defendant pleaded guilty to the underlying offense, he denied his guilt in a post-conviction statement to correction officials, and repeated that denial at the SORA hearing itself. Defendant's claim that the court shifted the burden of proof at the hearing

is unpreserved and without merit. On the contrary, the hearing court offered defendant an opportunity to accept responsibility, whereupon he did the opposite.THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: September 30, 2021



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

Related

People v. Saxton
2024 NY Slip Op 05072 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Almeida
186 N.Y.S.3d 652 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
People v. Krull
2022 NY Slip Op 04783 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2021 NY Slip Op 05174, 152 N.Y.S.3d 292, 197 A.D.3d 1073, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lozada-nyappdiv-2021.