From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Horne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 28, 2009
61 A.D.3d 945 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 2008-07325.

April 28, 2009.

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Westchester County (Loehr, J.), dated July 10, 2008, which, after a hearing, designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

Stephen J. Pittari, White Plains, N.Y. (David B. Weisfuse of counsel), for appellant.

Janet DiFiore, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Laurie Sapakoff, Richard Longworth Hecht, and Anthony J. Servino of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Rivera, J.P., Balkin, Leventhal and Lott, JJ.


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

The defendant was designated a level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C) based on an override for a prior conviction for a felony sex crime — promoting a sexual performance by a child. The defendant's contention that the override was improperly applied because that offense is not a "sex crime" is without merit. In relevant part, Correction Law § 168-a (2) defines a "sex offense" to include any offense under article 263 of the Penal Law. Promoting a sexual performance by a child is an offense under Penal Law § 263.15 ( see People v Johnson, 11 NY3d 416). Thus, the defendant was properly designated a level three sex offender.


Summaries of

People v. Horne

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 28, 2009
61 A.D.3d 945 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

People v. Horne

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. WAYNE HORNE, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 28, 2009

Citations

61 A.D.3d 945 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 3492
876 N.Y.S.2d 898

Citing Cases

People v. Barry

The application of an override, however, merely renders the defendant a presumptive level three offender, and…

People v. Barry

As the defendant concedes, the People sustained their burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence,…