From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Geehreng

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 19, 2012
101 A.D.3d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-12-19

PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent, v. Robert GEEHRENG, appellant.

Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (James H. Miller III of counsel), for appellant. Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Ronnie Jane Lamm of counsel), for respondent.


Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (James H. Miller III of counsel), for appellant. Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Ronnie Jane Lamm of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Kahn, J.), dated June 16, 2011, which, *531after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6–C.

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

The County Court properly designated the defendant a level two sex offender. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the County Court properly assessed 15 points under risk factor 11 (Drug or Alcohol Abuse–History of Abuse) ( see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 15 [2006]; People v. Gulley, 99 A.D.3d 979, 952 N.Y.S.2d 464;People v. Deturris, 90 A.D.3d 727, 934 N.Y.S.2d 336;People v. Harris, 74 A.D.3d 767, 901 N.Y.S.2d 534).

RIVERA, J.P., DILLON, LEVENTHAL and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Geehreng

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 19, 2012
101 A.D.3d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

People v. Geehreng

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent, v. Robert GEEHRENG, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 19, 2012

Citations

101 A.D.3d 975 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 8707
955 N.Y.S.2d 530

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The County Court's designation of the…

People v. King

The Supreme Court properly designated the defendant a level three sex offender. Contrary to the defendant's…