Opinion
518822.
04-30-2015
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daniel L. HARP, Appellant.
Abbie Goldbas, Utica, for appellant. John M. Muehl, District Attorney, Cooperstown (Michael F. Getman of counsel), for respondent.
Abbie Goldbas, Utica, for appellant.
John M. Muehl, District Attorney, Cooperstown (Michael F. Getman of counsel), for respondent.
Before: PETERS, P.J., EGAN JR., ROSE and LYNCH, JJ.
Opinion
PETERS, P.J. Appeal from an order of the County Court of Otsego County (Burns, J.), entered December 20, 2013, which classified defendant as a risk level III sex offender and a sexually violent offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.
Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of two counts each of course of sexual conduct against a child in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child. In anticipation of his release from prison, the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders presumptively classified defendant as a risk level III sex offender, assessing a total of 110 points on the risk assessment instrument. Following a hearing, County Court classified defendant as a risk level III sex offender and a sexually violent offender. Defendant now appeals.
We affirm. Initially, although County Court failed to set forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law, as required by Correction Law § 168–n(3), remittal is unnecessary as the court's oral findings “are clear, supported by the record and sufficiently detailed to permit intelligent review” (People v. Pavlisak, 115 A.D.3d 1132, 1132–1133, 982 N.Y.S.2d 792 [2014], lv. denied 23 N.Y.3d 907, 2014 WL 2922286 [2014] ; see People v. Carter, 106 A.D.3d 1202, 1202, 965 N.Y.S.2d 642 [2013] ). Defendant challenges the 15 points assessed under the history of alcohol abuse category on the risk assessment instrument. “An offender who has a substance abuse history or was abusing drugs and/or alcohol at the time of the offense may be assessed points” (People v. Clavette, 96 A.D.3d 1178, 1179, 946 N.Y.S.2d 310 [2012], lv. denied 20 N.Y.3d 851, 2012 WL 5845583 [2012] [citation omitted]; see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 15 [2006]; People v. Roberts, 108 A.D.3d 947, 948, 969 N.Y.S.2d 234 [2013], lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 852, 2013 WL 5614700 [2013] ). Here, the assessment of points was supported by clear and convincing evidence in the record, including information in the case summary that defendant admittedly abused alcohol during the time period that his course of sexual contact with the victims was ongoing and that he was recommended for an alcohol abuse treatment program while in prison (see People v. Englant, 118 A.D.3d 1289, 1289, 987 N.Y.S.2d 534 [2014] ; People v. Mundo, 98 A.D.3d 1292, 1293, 951 N.Y.S.2d 782 [2012], lv. denied 20 N.Y.3d 855, 2013 WL 69135 [2013] ). Finally, although there is some confusion as to whether County Court assessed defendant an additional 10 points for failing to accept responsibility, presumptively raising his total score from 110 points to 120 points, both scores lie within the risk level III category. Accordingly, we decline to disturb the classification of defendant as a risk level III sex offender.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.
EGAN JR., ROSE and LYNCH, JJ., concur.