Opinion
12885 Ind. No. 4745/16 Case No. 2020-04131
01-19-2021
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Zolton GOROCS, Defendant–Appellant.
Stephen Chu, Interim Attorney-in Charge, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Gabe Newland of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Rachel Bond of counsel), for respondent.
Stephen Chu, Interim Attorney-in Charge, Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Gabe Newland of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Rachel Bond of counsel), for respondent.
Webber, J.P., Mazzarelli, González, Scarpulla, Shulman, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ann E. Scherzer, J.), entered on or about September 24, 2019, which adjudicated defendant a level two sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6–C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly 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] ). There were no mitigating factors that were not adequately taken into account by the guidelines, and are outweighed by aggravating factors such as defendant's possession of particularly disturbing pornographic images of children as young as four years of age, and evidence that defendant shared the pornographic images on social media (see e. g. People v. Bell, 149 A.D.3d 666, 50 N.Y.S.3d 878 [1st Dept. 2017], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 916, 2017 WL 3900528 [2017] ). Defendant's age does not warrant a departure under all the circumstances.
Defendant did not preserve his challenge to the sufficiency of the court's findings. In any event, "there is no authority requiring the court to articulate its consideration of each step and its conclusions" ( People v. Diaz, 143 A.D.3d 552, 552, 39 N.Y.S.3d 429 [1st Dept. 2016] ). The court's reasoning in denying a departure was sufficiently explained on the record, and there is no need for a remand for further proceedings.