People v. Spring
This text of 83 A.D.3d 1028 (People v. Spring) 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.
Opinion
Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Kahn, J.), dated February 3, 2009, which, after a hearing, designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The defendant’s contention that he was entitled to a downward departure to a level two sex offender status is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Iorio, 74 AD3d 1306 [2010]; People v Rivera, 51 AD3d 646, 647 [2008]; People v Lewis, 50 AD3d 1567, 1568 [2008]). Jn any event, the defendant failed to demonstrate that there existed mitigating circumstances of a kind or to a degree not otherwise adequately taken into account by the guidelines that warranted a downward departure from his presumptive level three sex offender status (see People v Mendez, 79 AD3d 834 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 707 [2011]; People v Maiello, 32 AD3d 463 [2006]). Dillon, J.P., Covello, Florio and Hall, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
83 A.D.3d 1028, 921 N.Y.S.2d 539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-spring-nyappdiv-2011.