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.
PEOPLE of State of New York, respondent, v. Robert BROWN, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (McKay, J.), entered April 19, 2007, as, after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
In establishing the appropriate risk level determination under the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art. 6-C), the People bear the burden of proving the necessary facts by clear and convincing evidence (see Correction Law § 168-n[3]; People v. Hardy, 42 A.D.3d 487, 487, 841 N.Y.S.2d 117; People v. Lawless, 44 A.D.3d 738, 842 N.Y.S.2d 729). Here, the defendant contends that the People failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that he should be assessed 20 points under risk level factor 4, “Duration of Offense Conduct With Victim” (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines [2006 ed.] ). We disagree. The People submitted adequate proof that the defendant engaged in two or more acts of sexual contact against the victim, including at least one act of sexual intercourse, separated by at least 24 hours (see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines, Commentaries at 10 [2006 ed.]; People v. Bolton, 50 A.D.3d 990, 857 N.Y.S.2d 190; People v. Taylor, 48 A.D.3d 775, 776, 853 N.Y.S.2d 354; cf. People v. Wright, 53 A.D.3d 963, 964, 862 N.Y.S.2d 623).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
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.
Decided: March 03, 2009
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)