People v. Guitard
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court failed to sufficiently set forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law, as mandated by Correction Law § 168-n (3). However, remittal is not required since the record in this case is sufficient for this Court to make its own findings of fact and conclusions of law (see People v Banks, 48 AD3d 656 [2008]; People v Penson, 38 AD3d 866, 867 [2007]).
The defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court denied him due process by using the Risk Assessment Instrument prepared by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders (hereinafter the Board) in determining his risk level is…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- People v. WindhamNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
- People v. HinesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- People v. BowensAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- People v. BligenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- People v. PardoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- People v. ChampagneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- People v. CrandallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. FinizioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- People v. UrbanskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- People v. HarrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.