Court Opinion

ID: 5840851
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 23:05:20.894066+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:45.794268
License: Public Domain

Memorandum:
Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he was entitled to a downward departure from his presumptive risk level (see People v Clark, 66 AD3d 1366 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 713 [2009]; People v Ratcliff, 53 AD3d 1110 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 708 [2008]). In any event, that contention lacks merit “inasmuch as defendant failed to present clear and convincing evidence of special circumstances justifying a downward departure” (People v McDaniel, 27 AD3d 1158, 1159 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 703 [2006]). Present — Smith, J.E, Fahey, Garni, Sconiers and Gorski, JJ.