PEOPLE v. BYRD (2019)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:  On appeal from an order determining that he is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.), defendant contends that Supreme Court failed to consider his request for a downward departure from his presumptive risk level, requiring remittal.  We reject that contention.  “[T]he court's findings of fact rendered in conjunction with its oral decision are clear, supported by the record and sufficiently detailed to permit intelligent appellate review” (People v. Young, 108 A.D.3d 1232, 1233, 969 N.Y.S.2d 372 [4th Dept. 2013], lv denied 22 N.Y.3d 853, 2013 WL 5658386 [2013], rearg. denied 22 N.Y.3d 1036, 981 N.Y.S.2d 351, 4 N.E.3d 362 [2013] [internal quotation marks omitted];  cf. People v. Filkins, 107 A.D.3d 1069, 1070, 968 N.Y.S.2d 621 [3d Dept. 2013] ).  Here, defendant advanced a single ground in support of his request for a downward departure, and the court explicitly denied that request on the record.  To the extent that defendant contends that the court erred in denying his request, we conclude that he “failed to meet his burden of demonstrating by a preponderance of the evidence how th[e] alleged mitigating factor would tend to reduce the risk of his own recidivism or danger to the community” (People v. Loughlin, 145 A.D.3d 1426, 1428, 44 N.Y.S.3d 821 [4th Dept. 2016], lv denied 29 N.Y.3d 906, 57 N.Y.S.3d 710, 80 N.E.3d 403 [2017] ).