Opinion
2012-04-20
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, respondent, v. William BROCKINGTON, defendant-appellant.
Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.), entered September 21, 2010. The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (James Eckert Of Counsel), for defendant-appellant. Michael C. Green, District Attorney, Rochester (Nancy Gilligan of Counsel), for respondent.
Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.), entered September 21, 2010. The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (James Eckert Of Counsel), for defendant-appellant. Michael C. Green, District Attorney, Rochester (Nancy Gilligan of Counsel), for respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he was entitled to a downward departure from his presumptive risk level ( see People v. Ratcliff, 53 A.D.3d 1110, 862 N.Y.S.2d 686, lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 708, 868 N.Y.S.2d 600, 897 N.E.2d 1084). “In any event, that contention lacks merit inasmuch as defendant failed to present clear and convincing evidence of special circumstances justifying a downward departure” ( People v. Regan, 46 A.D.3d 1434, 1435, 848 N.Y.S.2d 787; see Ratcliff, 53 A.D.3d 1110, 862 N.Y.S.2d 686).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.