Legal Opinion
People v. Epstein
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 17, 2011PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Clear and convincing evidence, including reliable hearsay (see People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 571 [2009]) supported the assessment of points for risk factors sufficient for a level three sex offender adjudication (Correction Law § 168-n [3]). In the circumstances of this case, the court properly relied on highly reliable proof of criminal conduct for which defendant was neither indicted nor convicted.
The sex offender adjudication arises out of defendant’s sex offenses in Florida. The evidence before the SORA hearing court *571established that defendant committed multiple offenses against a series…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People v. MingoNew York Court of Appeals · 2009
- People v. WindhamNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
- People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
3Cited by15 opinions
- People v. ArrahmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- People v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- People v. SanfordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- People v. BadilloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023
- People v. BadilloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.