From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Green

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Feb 21, 2012
92 A.D.3d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-02-21

PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent, v. Jeffrey GREEN, appellant.

Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, N.Y., for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Bridget Rahilly Steller of counsel), for respondent.


Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, N.Y., for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Bridget Rahilly Steller of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Dutchess County (Dolan, J.), rendered September 27, 2007, which, after 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.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the People demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant's relationship with the complainant “had been established or promoted for the primary purpose of victimization,” such that the County Court properly assessed the defendant 20 points under risk factor seven (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 12 [2006 ed.]; see People v. Taylor, 48 A.D.3d 775, 776, 853 N.Y.S.2d 354; People v. Grosfeld, 35 A.D.3d 692, 693, 826 N.Y.S.2d 428). Accordingly, the defendant was properly adjudicated a level two sex offender.

In light of our determination, we need not reach the parties' remaining contentions.

SKELOS, J.P., DICKERSON, BELEN and MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Green

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Feb 21, 2012
92 A.D.3d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

People v. Green

Case Details

Full title:PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent, v. Jeffrey GREEN, appellant.

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

Date published: Feb 21, 2012

Citations

92 A.D.3d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 1441
938 N.Y.S.2d 810

Citing Cases

People v. Hamlin

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly assessed 20 points against him under risk…

People v. Hamlin

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly assessed 20 points against him under risk…