PEOPLE v. JOHNSON (2024)

DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cassandra M. Mullen, J.), dated December 14, 2023, which, after a hearing, designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6–C.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court did not violate his due process right to appear at his risk assessment hearing pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6–C;  see § 168–n[3]) when the court conducted the hearing in his absence.  “Where it is clear that the defendant's absence is deliberate, despite knowledge that the [hearing] is about to begin, he or she forfeits his or her right to be present, regardless of whether he or she was informed that the [hearing] would proceed in his or her absence” (People v. Brooks, 308 A.D.2d 99, 104, 763 N.Y.S.2d 86;  see People v. Wall, 112 A.D.3d 900, 901, 977 N.Y.S.2d 394).  Here, after the defendant was notified of the hearing, assigned counsel, and adequately apprised of the consequences of failing to appear, the defendant refused to appear at the hearing.  Under these circumstances, the court correctly determined that the defendant forfeited his right to be present and properly proceeded with the hearing in his absence (see People v. Jackson, 139 A.D.3d 1031, 1031, 31 N.Y.S.3d 598;  People v. Wall, 112 A.D.3d at 901, 977 N.Y.S.2d 394;  People v. Brooks, 308 A.D.2d 99, 763 N.Y.S.2d 86).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.

MILLER, J.P., CHRISTOPHER, VOUTSINAS and VENTURA, JJ., concur.