From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Barnwell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 30, 2004
6 A.D.3d 1146 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

KA 03-00498.

Decided April 30, 2004.

Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.), entered February 12, 2003. The order designated defendant as a level three sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act.

EDWARD J. NOWAK, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JAMES ECKERT OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

ANTHONY BARNWELL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT PRO SE.

MICHAEL C. GREEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY A. GILLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Before: PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., GREEN, WISNER, SCUDDER, AND GORSKI, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order designating him a level three offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.). The total risk factor score on the risk assessment instrument (RAI) prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders (Board) presumptively classified defendant as a level two offender, but the Board recommended an upward departure to level three based upon factors not adequately reflected in the RAI. County Court agreed with the Board that an upward departure from the presumptive risk level classification was warranted ( see People v. Delmarle, 2 A.D.3d 1446; Matter of O'Brien v. State of New York Div. of Probation Correctional Servs., 263 A.D.2d 804, 806, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 758), and we conclude that the court's designation of defendant as a level three offender is supported by clear and convincing evidence ( see § 168-n [3]; People v. Bottisti, 285 A.D.2d 841, 841-842). We have considered the contention raised in defendant's pro se supplemental brief and conclude that it lacks merit.


Summaries of

People v. Barnwell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 30, 2004
6 A.D.3d 1146 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

People v. Barnwell

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. ANTHONY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Apr 30, 2004

Citations

6 A.D.3d 1146 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
775 N.Y.S.2d 658

Citing Cases

People v. Sutton

The record establishes that defendant engaged in a continuous course of sexual misconduct and did not…

People v. Perkins

Contrary to defendant's contention, the court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the fact that…