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. Charles WASHINGTON, Defendant–Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Raymond L. Bruce, J.), entered on or about August 30, 2019, which adjudicated defendant a level two sexually violent offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6–C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court providently exercised its discretion in declining to grant a downward departure (see People v. Gillotti, 23 NY3d 841, 861 [2014] ). Although defendant presented evidence that he was legally blind, which was not accounted for by the risk assessment instrument, he presented no evidence that such impairment was linked to a reduced risk of recidivism (cf. People v. Sanchez, 186 AD3d 880, 882–883 [2d Dept 2020]; People v. Davis, 179 AD3d 183, 189 [2d Dept 2019] ). Defendant's educational and vocational efforts in prison, and his contributions to the church, are commendable, but they do not present mitigating circumstances not already taken into account by the risk assessment instrument (see People v. Cabrera–Fernandez, 242 AD3d 553 [1st Dept 2025]; see People v. Perez, 226 AD3d 487, 487 [1st Dept 2024], lv denied 42 NY3d 905 [2024] ). In any event, even if we were to consider the mitigating factors set forth by defendant, the totality of circumstances does not warrant a departure to level one. Defendant's criminal history includes a sex offense against a minor, whom he raped while threatening her with a weapon. “Even if defendant is less likely to reoffend, a downward departure is unwarranted due to the magnitude of harm that would result if he did reoffend” (People v. Martinez, 244 AD3d 423, 423 [1st Dept 2025] [internal quotation marks omitted] ).
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: Ind. No.4179 /82
Decided: April 09, 2026
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)