Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tara MCDONALD, Defendant-Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Antignani, J.), entered on or about March 8, 2019, which adjudicated defendant a level one sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Defendant's as-applied substantive due process challenge to the requirement that she register as a sex offender is unavailing. Notwithstanding that it is undisputed that there was no sexual component to defendant's conduct, motive, or her underlying mental illness, defendant's repeated conduct, which targeted infants in strollers, and consisted of attempting to take the infants from their caregivers based on a psychotic misperception that the babies were at risk of suffocation, carried with it the risk of sexual harm to the children (see People v. Knox, 12 N.Y.3d 60, 68, 875 N.Y.S.2d 828, 903 N.E.2d 1149 [2009], cert denied 558 U.S. 1011, 130 S.Ct. 552, 175 L.Ed.2d 382 [2009]). Defendant's conduct was very similar to the conduct found to require sex offender registration in Knox, where “[t]aking the child was [the defendant's] objective and if [the defendant] had been successful in her attempt to kidnap and remove the child ‘from the safety of everyday surroundings,’ the child indeed could have been left vulnerable to sex abuse or exploitation” (cf. People v. Brown, 41 N.Y.3d 279, 287, 209 N.Y.S.3d 289, 232 N.E.3d 1223 [2023]). This is not one of the unusual cases in which the circumstances provide no reason to believe that the defendant will engage in sexual misconduct or non-sexual conduct that correlates with higher risk of sexual harm to a child (see id. at 288-289, 209 N.Y.S.3d 289, 232 N.E.3d 1223).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 5266
Decided: December 02, 2025
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)