The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Melendez, Defendant–Appellant. (2011)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph Melendez, Defendant–Appellant.

4727

Decided: April 07, 2011

Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Moskowitz, Román, JJ.

Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Joanne Legano Ross of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Craig A. Ascher of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (John Cataldo, J.), entered on or about October 20, 2008, which adjudicated defendant a level two sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6–C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion in declining to grant a downward departure from defendant's presumptive risk level (see People v. Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 568 n 2 [2009]; People v. Johnson, 11 NY3d 416, 421 [2008] ). The mitigating factors asserted by defendant were adequately taken into account by the risk assessment instrument, and were outweighed by the seriousness of the underlying sex crimes against a child (see e.g. People v. Aboy, 60 AD3d 436 [2009], lv denied 12 NY3d711[2009] ). Defendant's argument that he poses a diminished threat of reoffense is without merit (see People v. Rodriguez, 67 AD3d 596, 597 [2009], lv. denied 14 NY3d 706 [2010] ).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

CLERK

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network