From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Guichardo

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan 18, 2017
146 A.D.3d 910 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

01-18-2017

PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent, v. Reinaldo GUICHARDO, appellant.

Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, NY (Michael C. Taglieri of counsel), for appellant. Eric Gonzalez, Acting District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Morgan J. Dennehy of counsel), for respondent.


Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, NY (Michael C. Taglieri of counsel), for appellant.

Eric Gonzalez, Acting District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Morgan J. Dennehy of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D'Emic, J.), dated November 13, 2014, 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 appeals from an order designating him a level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (see Correction Law article 6–C; hereinafter SORA).

"In establishing a defendant's risk level pursuant to SORA, the People bear the burden of establishing the facts supporting the determinations sought by clear and convincing evidence" (People v. Crandall, 90 A.D.3d 628, 629, 934 N.Y.S.2d 446 ; see Correction Law § 168–n[3] ). "In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer , parole officer, or corrections counselor, case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders ..., or any other reliable source, including reliable hearsay" (People v. Crandall, 90 A.D.3d at 629, 934 N.Y.S.2d 446 ). Here, the Supreme Court properly assessed 15 points against the defendant under risk factor 11 and 15 points against him under risk factor 12. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the assessment of these points was supported by clear and convincing evidence in the record. Accordingly, the court properly designated the defendant a level three sex offender.

LEVENTHAL, J.P., HALL, SGROI and DUFFY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Guichardo

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan 18, 2017
146 A.D.3d 910 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

People v. Guichardo

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent, v. Reinaldo GUICHARDO, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Jan 18, 2017

Citations

146 A.D.3d 910 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
44 N.Y.S.3d 768
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 330

Citing Cases

People v. Phillips

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.In establishing a defendant's risk level…

People v. Dipilato

"Contrary to the defendant's contention, since the victim's physical helplessness was not the result of, or…