From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Wester

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Nov 12, 2021
No. 2021-06295 (N.Y. App. Div. Nov. 12, 2021)

Opinion

2021-06295

11-12-2021

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. ROBERT WESTER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (TIMOTHY S. DAVIS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY GILLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.


TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (TIMOTHY S. DAVIS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY GILLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, TROUTMAN, WINSLOW, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Christopher S. Ciaccio, J.), entered May 8, 2019. The order determined that defendant is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: On appeal from an order determining that he is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.), defendant contends that County Court erred in denying his request for a downward departure from his presumptive risk level because he met his burden of proving the existence of a mitigating factor to warrant the downward departure, i.e., he had an exceptional response to treatment. We reject that contention. While defendant is correct that "[a]n offender's response to treatment, if exceptional, can be the basis for a downward departure" (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 17 [2006]), we conclude that defendant failed to meet his burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that his response was exceptional (see People v Antonetti, 188 A.D.3d 1630, 1631 [4th Dept 2020], lv denied 36 N.Y.3d 910 [2021]; People v Rivera, 144 A.D.3d 1595, 1596 [4th Dept 2016], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 915 [2017]). Moreover, even assuming, arguendo, that defendant demonstrated that his response to treatment was exceptional, we nevertheless conclude, based upon the totality of the circumstances, that a downward departure is not warranted (see Antonetti, 188 A.D.3d at 1632; Rivera, 144 A.D.3d at 1596; see generally People v Gillotti, 23 N.Y.3d 841, 861 [2014]).


Summaries of

People v. Wester

Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Nov 12, 2021
No. 2021-06295 (N.Y. App. Div. Nov. 12, 2021)
Case details for

People v. Wester

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. ROBERT WESTER…

Court:Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 12, 2021

Citations

No. 2021-06295 (N.Y. App. Div. Nov. 12, 2021)