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. Tulsie SINGH, Defendant–Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Efrain Alvarado, J.), entered on or about January 4, 2017, 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.
Defendant was properly assessed 20 points under the risk factor for continuing course of sexual misconduct based on his sexual abuse of the victim on multiple occasions, as established by the victim's reliable grand jury testimony (see People v. Mingo, 12 N.Y.3d 563, 573, 883 N.Y.S.2d 154, 910 N.E.2d 983 [2009] ). Furthermore, defendant's plea allocution corroborated the grand jury testimony, as well as clearly established that the victim was less than 10 years old when the sexual abuse began, thereby supporting an assessment of 30 points under the factor based on the victim's age.
Defendant was also properly assessed 20 points for his exploitation of a professional relationship with the victim. Defendant, a teacher, used his role to secure the victim's trust in order to sexually abuse him (see People v. Briggs, 86 A.D.3d 903, 904–905, 928 N.Y.S.2d 108 [3rd Dept. 2011] ). We see no reason to limit this risk factor to professionals such as health care providers whose relationships with potential victims involve body contact.
Finally, defendant's affirmative claim of actual innocence, despite having pleaded guilty, supported an assessment of points for failure to accept responsibility.
The court providently exercised its discretion in declining to grant a downward departure (see People v. Gillotti, 23 N.Y.3d 841, 861, 994 N.Y.S.2d 1, 18 N.E.3d 701 [2014] ). There were no mitigating factors that were not adequately taken into account in the risk assessment instrument, or that outweighed the seriousness of the underlying offense.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 7239
Decided: October 04, 2018
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)