From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cook

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Aug 2, 2017
153 A.D.3d 561 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

08-02-2017

PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent, v. William COOK, appellant.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, NY (Lisa Napoli and Warren S. Landau of counsel), for appellant. Michael E. McMahon, District Attorney, Staten Island, NY (Morrie I. Kleinbart and Paul M. Tarr of counsel), for respondent.


Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, NY (Lisa Napoli and Warren S. Landau of counsel), for appellant.

Michael E. McMahon, District Attorney, Staten Island, NY (Morrie I. Kleinbart and Paul M. Tarr of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rienzi, J.), dated November 19, 2012, which, after a hearing, designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6–C. By decision and order dated May 20, 2015, this Court affirmed the order (see People v. Cook, 128 A.D.3d 927, 9 N.Y.S.3d 400 ). On March 30, 2017, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision and order of this Court and remitted the matter to this Court for consideration of issues raised but not determined on the appeal to this Court (see People v. Cook, 29 N.Y.3d 121, 53 N.Y.S.3d 238, 75 N.E.3d 655 ). Justice Hall has been substituted for former Justice Skelos (see 22 NYCRR 670.1 [c] ). ORDERED that, upon remittitur from the Court of Appeals, the order is affirmed.

The People established, by clear and convincing evidence, the existence of an aggravating factor that was not adequately taken into account by the Sex Offender Registration Act (see Correction Law art. 6–C; hereinafter SORA) Guidelines (see

Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary [2006; hereinafter Guidelines]; Correction Law § 168 et seq. ) issued by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders, and which " tend[s] to establish a higher likelihood of reoffense or danger to the community" (People v. Wyatt, 89 A.D.3d 112, 123, 931 N.Y.S.2d 85 ; see Correction Law § 168–n[3] ; People v. Gillotti, 23 N.Y.3d 841, 861–862, 994 N.Y.S.2d 1, 18 N.E.3d 701 ; Guidelines at 4), namely, that the defendant committed sexual offenses against a young girl with physical disabilities that rendered her "particularly vulnerable" (People v. Czaplicki, 61 A.D.3d 660, 662, 876 N.Y.S.2d 490 ). We find no basis to disturb the Supreme Court's exercise of its discretion to grant the People's request for an upward departure to designate the defendant a level three sex offender under SORA.

DILLON, J.P., HALL, AUSTIN and HINDS–RADIX, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Cook

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Aug 2, 2017
153 A.D.3d 561 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Cook

Case Details

Full title:People of State of New York, respondent, v. William Cook, appellant.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Aug 2, 2017

Citations

153 A.D.3d 561 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
56 N.Y.S.3d 886
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 5983

Citing Cases

People v. Ross

Here, the victim was not physically helpless as defined within risk factor 6, as the record reflects that she…

People v. Ross

Here, the victim was not physically helpless as defined within risk factor 6, as the record reflects that she…