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 Fareira, appellant.
Submitted-December 16, 2010
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sullivan, J.), dated April 29, 2009, 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.
The People established, by clear and convincing evidence, that the defendant had been previously convicted of two felony sex crimes. Therefore, he was presumptively a level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (hereinafter SORA) by application of “automatic override number one” in his Risk Assessment Instrument, which override addresses a prior felony conviction for a sex crime (see Correction Law article 6-C; see generally People v. King, 74 AD3d 1162). The party seeking a downward departure from the presumptive risk level has the burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that there are mitigating factors “of a kind, or to a degree, that [are] otherwise not adequately taken into account” by the guidelines (SORA: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 4 [2006 ed.]; see People v. King, 74 AD3d 1162; People v. Pietarniello, 53 AD3d 475, 478; People v. Sam, 67 AD3d 876, 876-877). Here, the defendant did not submit any evidence to show the existence of such mitigating factors. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly designated the defendant a level three sex offender.
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review.
PRUDENTI, P.J., ANGIOLILLO, FLORIO and SGROI, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of the Court
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: 2009-04496
Decided: January 11, 2011
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)