Court Opinion

ID: 4114810
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-01-11 14:08:46.967967+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:46:08.751109
License: Public Domain

People v Lopez (2017 NY Slip Op 00107)

People v Lopez

2017 NY Slip Op 00107

Decided on January 10, 2017

Appellate Division, First 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 January 10, 2017

Tom, J.P., Richter, Saxe, Gische, Gesmer, JJ.

2682 3626/13

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
vEdgar Lopez, Defendant-Appellant.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Abigail Everett of counsel), for appellant.
Darcel D. Clark, District Attorney, Bronx (Julia L. Chariott of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Margaret L. Clancy, J.), entered August 4, 2015, which adjudicated defendant a level two sexually violent offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court providently exercised its discretion when it declined to grant a downward departure (see People v Gillotti, 23 NY3d 841 [2014]). The mitigating factors cited by defendant were adequately taken into account by the risk assessment instrument or were outweighed by the seriousness of the underlying crime, which consisted of repeated sexual abuse of a nine-year-old child over an extended period. In particular, we do not find defendant's age to be a significant mitigating factor, given that he committed the underlying crime at the age of 41 and is now only three years older.
The court properly designated defendant a sexually violent offender because he was convicted of an enumerated offense, and the court lacked discretion to do otherwise (see People v Bullock, 125 AD3d 1 [1st Dept 2014], lv denied 24 NY3d 915 [2015]).	We have considered and rejected defendant's constitutional arguments.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: JANUARY 10, 2017
CLERK