Court Opinion

ID: 9902024
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-22 20:07:55.682466+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:21:44.140183
License: Public Domain

People v Baker (2023 NY Slip Op 06062)

People v Baker

2023 NY Slip Op 06062

Decided on November 22, 2023

Appellate Division, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on November 22, 2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
ANGELA G. IANNACCI
JOSEPH J. MALTESE
LILLIAN WAN, JJ.

2018-07898

[*1]The People of the State of New York, respondent, 
vRandy Baker, appellant. 

Craig S. Leeds, New York, NY, for appellant.
Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove, Morgan J. Dennehy, and Daniel Berman of counsel), for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from an order of Supreme Court, Kings County (Guy J. Mangano, Jr., J.), dated May 16, 2018, 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.
In this proceeding pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), the defendant appeals from an order, made after a hearing, designating him a level three sex offender.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel (see People v Oliver, 215 AD3d 772).
The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court erred in relying on the risk assessment instrument is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]) and, in any event, without merit.
The defendant's remaining contention does not entitle him to relief under the circumstances (cf. People v Torres, 210 AD3d 1027, 1028).
DILLON, J.P., IANNACCI, MALTESE and WAN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Darrell M. Joseph
Acting Clerk of the Court