From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rivera

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Nov 8, 2013
111 A.D.3d 1275 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-11-8

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Eugene RIVERA, Defendant–Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.), entered February 21, 2012. The order determined that defendant is a level three *813risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act. Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (James Eckert of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Nancy Gilligan of Counsel), for Respondent.


Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.), entered February 21, 2012. The order determined that defendant is a level three *813risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.
Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (James Eckert of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Nancy Gilligan of Counsel), for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:

On appeal from an order determining that he is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.), defendant contends that County Court's determination of his risk level is not supported by the requisite clear and convincing evidence ( see § 168–n [3] ). We reject that contention. “ ‘The statements in the case summary and presentence report with respect to [the number of victims and the age of the victims] constitute reliable hearsay supporting the court's assessment of points' ” under those risk factors ( People v. St. Jean, 101 A.D.3d 1684, 1684, 956 N.Y.S.2d 763;see People v. Adams, 101 A.D.3d 1792, 1792–1793, 959 N.Y.S.2d 304,lv. denied 20 N.Y.3d 860, 2013 WL 599549;People v. Vaughn, 26 A.D.3d 776, 776–777, 809 N.Y.S.2d 718). Defendant admitted that he had sexual contact with the victims in question, and there was reliable hearsay to establish that at least one of the victims was 10 years of age or younger at the time of the incident.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, LINDLEY, and SCONIERS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Rivera

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Nov 8, 2013
111 A.D.3d 1275 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

People v. Rivera

Case Details

Full title:The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Eugene RIVERA…

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

Date published: Nov 8, 2013

Citations

111 A.D.3d 1275 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 7294
974 N.Y.S.2d 812

Citing Cases

People v. Scott

In any event, defendant's contention lacks merit. The statements in the case summary and presentence report…

People v. Lorenzo

"In assessing points, evidence may be derived from reliable hearsay" ( People v. Destio , 145 A.D.3d 1047,…