People v. Mingo
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Ritter, J.
The issue to be decided on this appeal is whether documents generated by the District Attorney’s office in prosecuting the defendant on the underlying indictment constituted “reliable hearsay” within the meaning of the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C [hereinafter SORA]) and provided clear and convincing evidence that the defendant was armed with a dangerous instrument during the commission of his sex offense. We find that they did and affirm the defendant’s designation as a level two sex offender.
In 1988, the defendant was indicted for rape…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Colorado v. New MexicoSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Doe v. PatakiDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- People v. StevensNew York Court of Appeals · 1998
- Nucci v. ProperNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
- People v. BrooksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- People v. MingoNew York Court of Appeals · 2009
- People v. GoodwinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. TaylorAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. MercadoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. RobinsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.