People v. Rosen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rosen

117 A.D.3d 927, 985 N.Y.S.2d 903

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 21, 2014

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 117 A.D.3d 927 (People v. Rosen) 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. Rosen, 117 A.D.3d 927, 985 N.Y.S.2d 903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), entered June 10, 2013, which, after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

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

The defendant was designated a level two sex offender based upon his conviction of promoting an obscene sexual performance by a child and possessing an obscene sexual performance by a child. The defendant contends that he was improperly assessed 80 points by the court, five points more than the 75 points required for adjudicating him a level two sex offender, based upon the number of victims and the fact that children depicted on child pornography accessed by him were strangers to him. Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the assessment of those points was supported by clear and convincing evidence in the record (see People v Johnson, 11 NY3d 416, 422 [2008]; People v Brown, 116 AD3d 1017 [2014]; People v Bretan, 84 AD3d 906, 907 [2011]).

Further, the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence any ground for a downward departure from his presumptive risk level (see People v Worrell, 113 AD3d 742, 743 [2014]; People v Roldan, 111 AD3d 909 [2013]; People v Wyatt, 89 AD3d 112, 128 [2011]).

Rivera, J.E, Austin, Roman and Hinds-Radix, JJ, concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Westchester County (Cacace, J.), entered June 10, 2013, which, after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

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

The defendant was designated a level two sex offender based upon his conviction of promoting an obscene sexual performance by a child and possessing an obscene sexual performance by a child. The defendant contends that he was improperly assessed 80 points by the court, five points more than the 75 points required for adjudicating him a level two sex offender, based upon the number of victims and the fact that children depicted on child pornography accessed by him were strangers to him. Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the assessment of those points was supported by clear and convincing evidence in the record (see People v Johnson, 11 NY3d 416, 422 [2008]; People v Brown, 116 AD3d 1017 [2014]; People v Bretan, 84 AD3d 906, 907 [2011]).

Further, the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence any ground for a downward departure from his presumptive risk level (see People v Worrell, 113 AD3d 742, 743 [2014]; People v Roldan, 111 AD3d 909 [2013]; People v Wyatt, 89 AD3d 112, 128 [2011]).

Rivera, J.E, Austin, Roman and Hinds-Radix, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.3d 927, 985 N.Y.S.2d 903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rosen-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack