Majority
Appeal by the de
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court’s determination to designate the defendant a level three sex offender was supported by clear and convincing evidence (see People v Rivera, 73 AD3d 881 , 882 [2010]; People v Turner, 68 AD3d 1082 [2009]; People v Fisher, 36 AD3d 880 [2007]). There is no merit to the defendant’s contention that he was entitled to a downward departure from this risk level (see People v Gonzalez, 48 AD3d 284 [2008]; People v Lombard, 30 AD3d 573 [2006]; see also People v Johnson, 77 AD3d 1039 , 1040 [2010]). Angiolillo, J.E, Florio, Lott and Austin, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Rivera 73 AD3d 881 at 882 p. 910
- People v. Fisher 36 AD3d 880 p. 910
- People v. Gonzalez 48 AD3d 284 p. 910
- People v. Lombard 30 AD3d 573 p. 910
- People v. Johnson 77 AD3d 1039 at 1040 p. 910