People v. Lynch

189 N.Y.S.3d 739, 2023 NY Slip Op 03248
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 14, 2023
Docket2022-07402
StatusPublished

This text of 189 N.Y.S.3d 739 (People v. Lynch) 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. Lynch, 189 N.Y.S.3d 739, 2023 NY Slip Op 03248 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

People v Lynch (2023 NY Slip Op 03248)
People v Lynch
2023 NY Slip Op 03248
Decided on June 14, 2023
Appellate Division, Second 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 on June 14, 2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
BETSY BARROS, J.P.
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
BARRY E. WARHIT
JANICE A. TAYLOR, JJ.

2022-07402

[*1]People of State of New York, respondent,

v

Christopher Lynch, appellant.


Clare J. Degnan, White Plains, NY (Salvatore A. Gaetani of counsel), for appellant.

Miriam E. Rocah, District Attorney, White Plains, NY (William C. Milaccio and Steven A. Bender of counsel), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Susan Cacace, J.), dated July 1, 2022, which, after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correctional Law article 6-C.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly denied his application for a downward departure from his presumptive risk level of two to risk level one. The court properly determined that the imposition of points under risk factors 3 (number of victims) and 7 (relationship with victim) did not result in an overassessment of the defendant's risk to public safety (see People v Gillotti, 23 NY3d 841, 861; People v Glosque, 201 AD3d 823, 824; People v Cartiglia, 169 AD3d 725, 726; People v Tirado, 165 AD3d 991, 992; cf. People v Sesito, 195 AD3d 869, 870; People v Gonzalez, 189 AD3d 509, 511), and the defendant failed to otherwise demonstrate the existence of a mitigating factor not already taken into account by the risk assessment instrument that would warrant a downward departure (see People v Gillotti, 23 NY3d at 857).

BARROS, J.P., MALTESE, WARHIT and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Maria T. Fasulo

Clerk of the Court



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

Related

People v. Sestito
2021 NY Slip Op 03859 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Gillotti
18 N.E.3d 701 (New York Court of Appeals, 2014)
People v. Glosque
157 N.Y.S.3d 392 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
189 N.Y.S.3d 739, 2023 NY Slip Op 03248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lynch-nyappdiv-2023.