Opinion
5875 Ind. 5603/10
03-01-2018
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Nolber QUINONES, Defendant–Appellant.
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Lisa A. Packard of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Diane N. Princ of counsel), for respondent.
Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Lisa A. Packard of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Diane N. Princ of counsel), for respondent.
Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Tom, Mazzarelli, Oing, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael R. Sonberg, J.), entered on or about December 18, 2015, which adjudicated defendant a level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6–C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
We reject defendant's argument that 15 points should be deducted from his point score based on the People's violation of the 10–day notice provision of Correction Law 168–n(3), or that any further proceedings are necessary. The court provided a sufficient remedy when it offered defendant an adjournment for further preparation (see People v. Lucas, 118 A.D.3d 415, 986 N.Y.S.2d 479 [1st Dept. 2014] ), an offer that was declined. Defendant's contention that an adjournment would have interfered with his conditional release from prison is speculative (compare People v. Cruz, 132 A.D.3d 554, 17 N.Y.S.3d 863 [1st Dept. 2015] [defendant actually overdue for release] ). In any event, the omission of the additional 15 points from the original risk assessment instrument was essentially a clerical error, and defendant conceded that there were no grounds to object to the factual predicate for this assessment.
The court providently exercised its discretion when it declined to grant a downward departure (see People v. Gillotti, 23 N.Y.3d 841, 994 N.Y.S.2d 1, 18 N.E.3d 701 [2014] ). The mitigating factors cited by defendant were adequately taken into account by the risk assessment instrument, or were outweighed by the circumstances of the underlying crime.