Legal Opinion
People v. Rosado
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 25, 2011PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court properly determined that the defendant was not entitled to a downward departure from his presumptive risk level and, thus, properly designated him a level two sex offender (see People v Wyatt, 89 AD3d 112 [2011]; People v Livingston, 87 AD3d 628 [2011]; People v Alston, 86 AD3d 553; 554 [2011]; People v Rodriguez, 67 AD3d 596, 597 [2009]; People v Adams, 44 AD3d 1020 [2007]; People v Wragg, 41 AD3d 1273, 1274 [2007]; cf. People v Stevens, 55 AD3d 892, 894 [2008]).
The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Dillon, J.E, Balkin, Eng and Cohen, JJ., concur.
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. WyattAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. StevensAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. WraggAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. RodriguezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- People v. AdamsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- People v. MartinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011