Opinion
608 CA 22-00880
10-06-2023
D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, PLLC, SYRACUSE (REBECCA L. KONST OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT. LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (KATE H. NEPVEU OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.
D.J. & J.A. CIRANDO, PLLC, SYRACUSE (REBECCA L. KONST OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.
LETITIA JAMES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (KATE H. NEPVEU OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENTS-RESPONDENTS.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CURRAN, MONTOUR, OGDEN, AND DELCONTE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from an order, entered after an annual review hearing pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law § 10.09 (d), determining that he is a dangerous sex offender requiring confinement under section 10.03 (e), and directing his continued confinement to a secure treatment facility (see § 10.09 [h] ). We affirm.
Petitioner contends that his sex offender treatment plan should be modified to focus on his diagnoses of antisocial personality disorder and the condition of hypersexuality, rather than a provisional diagnosis of pedophilic disorder. That contention is raised for the first time on appeal, and thus is not properly before us (see Matter of State of New York v. Edward T. , 161 A.D.3d 1589, 1589, 73 N.Y.S.3d 919 [4th Dept. 2018] ; Matter of State of New York v. Breeden , 140 A.D.3d 1649, 1650, 34 N.Y.S.3d 814 [4th Dept. 2016] ). In any event, we note that the adequacy of a sex offender treatment plan is not before the court in an annual review proceeding under Mental Hygiene Law § 10.09 (d) (see generally Matter of James WW. v. State of New York , 201 A.D.3d 1069, 1071, 160 N.Y.S.3d 166 [3d Dept. 2022], lv denied 38 N.Y.3d 909, 2022 WL 2126935 [2022] ).