From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Mason

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 12, 2006
35 A.D.3d 569 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

No. 2005-03373.

December 12, 2006.

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Hinrichs, J.), dated March 11, 2005, which, after a hearing, designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

Del Atwell, East Hampton, N.Y., for appellant.

Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Steven A. Hovani of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Skelos and Fisher, JJ., concur.


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

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's determination designating him a level three sex offender is supported by clear and convincing evidence ( see Correction Law § 168-n; People v Maiello, 32 AD3d 463; People v Johnson, 23 AD3d 635).

The defendant failed to present clear and convincing evidence of the existence of special circumstances to warrant a downward departure from his presumptive risk level as determined by the risk assessment instrument ( see People v Davis, 26 AD3d 364; People v Masters, 19 AD3d 387; People v Williams, 19 AD3d 388).


Summaries of

People v. Mason

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 12, 2006
35 A.D.3d 569 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

People v. Mason

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. IVAN MASON, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 12, 2006

Citations

35 A.D.3d 569 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 9438
824 N.Y.S.2d 739

Citing Cases

People v. Regan

Finally, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he was entitled to a downward…

People v. Pardo

Further, given that generally, the use of the risk assessment instrument results in the proper risk…