From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Beazer

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 11, 2020
181 A.D.3d 729 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

2018–01431

03-11-2020

PEOPLE of State of New York, Respondent, v. Glen BEAZER, Appellant.

Thomas N.N. Angell, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Steven Levine of counsel), for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Bridget Rahilly Steller of counsel), for respondent.


Thomas N.N. Angell, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Steven Levine of counsel), for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Bridget Rahilly Steller of counsel), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., JOSEPH J. MALTESE, BETSY BARROS, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

In establishing a defendant's risk level pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6–C), the People bear the burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, the facts supporting the determinations sought (see Correction Law § 168–n[3] ; People v. Mitchell, 142 A.D.3d 542, 543, 36 N.Y.S.3d 490 ; People v. Wyatt, 89 A.D.3d 112, 117–118, 931 N.Y.S.2d 85 ). "In assessing points, evidence may be derived from the defendant's admissions, the victim's statements, evaluative reports completed by the supervising probation officer, parole officer, or corrections counselor, case summaries prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders ..., or any other reliable source, including reliable hearsay" ( People v. Crandall, 90 A.D.3d 628, 629, 934 N.Y.S.2d 446 ; see People v. Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d 563, 573, 883 N.Y.S.2d 154, 910 N.E.2d 983 ).

We agree with the County Court's determination to assess the defendant 25 points under risk factor 2 based on the defendant's own admission, which established that the defendant engaged in anal sexual conduct with the complainant (see Penal Law § 130.00[2][b] ). We also agree with the court's determination to assess the defendant 10 points under risk factor 13 for unsatisfactory conduct while confined based upon a recent tier III disciplinary violation (see People v. Lima–Sanchez, 162 A.D.3d 698, 79 N.Y.S.3d 52 ; People v. Anderson, 137 A.D.3d 988, 27 N.Y.S.3d 616 ; People v. Williams, 102 A.D.3d 665, 956 N.Y.S.2d 912 ).

Accordingly, we agree with the County Court's determination to designate the defendant a level two sex offender.

RIVERA, J.P., MALTESE, BARROS, BRATHWAITE NELSON and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Beazer

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Mar 11, 2020
181 A.D.3d 729 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

People v. Beazer

Case Details

Full title:People of State of New York, respondent, v. Glen Beazer, appellant. Thomas…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Mar 11, 2020

Citations

181 A.D.3d 729 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
181 A.D.3d 729
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 1652

Citing Cases

People v. Thomas

The "concern with sex offenders who direct their crimes at strangers is... [that they] pose a special danger…