From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Kraus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 2009
66 A.D.3d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 2008-04007.

October 20, 2009.

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), dated April 9, 2008, which, after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Nancy E. Little of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Morgan J. Dennehy, and Maria Park of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Fisher, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Roman, JJ., concur.


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

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to downwardly depart from the defendant's presumptive risk level inasmuch as there was no clear and convincing evidence in the record of a mitigating factor "of a kind or to a degree, not otherwise adequately taken into account by the guidelines" (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 4 [2006]; see People v Burgos, 39 AD3d 520; cf. People v Agard, 35 AD3d 568).


Summaries of

People v. Kraus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 20, 2009
66 A.D.3d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

People v. Kraus

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. THOMAS KRAUS, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 20, 2009

Citations

66 A.D.3d 854 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 7605
886 N.Y.S.2d 621

Citing Cases

People v. Victor Cruz

A departure from the presumptive risk level is warranted where "there exists an aggravating or mitigating…

People v. Burch

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The County Court did not improvidently…