Majority
Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Kahn, J.), dated October 9, 2014, which, after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
In determining a defendant’s risk level pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (see Correction Law art 6-C [hereinafter SORA]), “[a] downward departure from a sex offender’s presumptive risk level generally is only warranted where there exists a mitigating factor of a kind, or to a degree, that is not otherwise adequately taken into account by the SORA Guidelines” (People v Watson, 95 AD3d 978 , 979 [2012]; see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 4 [2006]). Although response to treatment may qualify as a ground for a downward departure where the re
Accordingly, the County Court properly denied the defendant’s request for a downward departure from his presumptive designation as a level two sex offender, and designated him a level two sex offender. Dillon, J.P., Dickerson, Roman and LaSalle, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Watson 95 AD3d 978 at 979 p. 600
- People v. Coleman 122 AD3d 599 at 599 p. 601
- People v. Washington 84 AD3d 910 at 911 p. 601