People v. Ensell
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act ([SORA] Correction Law § 168 et seq.). Contrary to the contention of defendant, County Court’s determination of his risk level is supported by the requisite clear and convincing evidence (see § 168-n [3]; People v Vacanti, 26 AD3d 732, 733 [2006], lv denied 6 NY3d 714 [2006]; People v Hamelinck, 23 AD3d 1060 [2005]). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, the case summary constitutes reliable hearsay, and the court properly considered it in determining…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. BrooksAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- People v. VaughnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- People v. HamelinckAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- People v. PorterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. VacantiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. KearnsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- People v. DistaffenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- People v. Abdul-JalilAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- POLEUN, JAMES R., PEOPLE vAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- People v. CalebAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.