People v. Palmer
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, in determining his risk level under the Sex Offender Registration Act (see Correction Law art 6-C), the Supreme Court properly assessed points under risk factor 11, pertaining to “[d]rug or [a]lcohol [a]buse,” based upon his admission that he was using alcohol at the time of the offense (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary, at 15 [2006]; see People v Sterling, 71 AD3d 654 [2010]; People v Britt, 66 AD3d 853 [2009]; People v Carpenter, 60 AD3d 833 [2009]). Accordingly, the defendant *677was properly designated a level two…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. CarpenterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- People v. BrittAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- People v. SterlingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010