People v. Wilson, 2020 NY Slip Op 4668 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Wilson, 2020 NY Slip Op 4668 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) People v. Richmond (4×) also: Cited "see"
N.Y. App. Div. · 2025 · confidence medium
Contrary to defendant's contention, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his request for a downward departure from his presumptive risk level ( see People v Wilson , 186 AD3d 1066, 1067 [4th Dept 2020], lv denied 36 NY3d 902 [2020]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Currington
N.Y. App. Div. · 2023 · confidence medium
Indeed, the sole information in the record regarding defendant's purported history of drug abuse is the "conclusory hearsay" statement ( People v Kowal , 175 AD3d 1057 , 1058 [4th Dept 2019]) of a correctional treatment specialist—here, a licensed marriage and family therapist—who commented in the updated treatment assessment he prepared prior to defendant's release from incarceration that defendant had "substance abuse problems with steroids pre-confinement" but that confinement had "cleaned . . . up" that problem such that defendant now understood "the repercussions of that type of abuse…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Hicks
N.Y. App. Div. · 2022 · confidence medium
The People failed to establish by "the requisite clear and convincing evidence" ( People v Wilson , 186 AD3d 1066, 1067 [4th Dept 2020], lv denied 36 NY3d 902 [2020]) that the crime for which defendant was convicted in Florida is "tantamount to a crime under New York law" ( People v Perez , 35 NY3d 85 , 87 [2020], rearg denied 35 NY3d 986 [2020]; see generally People v Bean , 190 AD3d 622 , 622 [1st Dept 2021], lv denied 36 NY3d 913 [2021]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
People
v.
Wilson
379 KA 19-00864.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Aug 20, 2020.
2020 NY Slip Op 4668
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
People v Wilson (2020 NY Slip Op 04668)
People v Wilson
2020 NY Slip Op 04668
Decided on August 20, 2020
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on August 20, 2020 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ.

379 KA 19-00864

[*1]THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

WILBERT WILSON, JR., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.




ANDREW D. CORREIA, PUBLIC DEFENDER, LYONS (BRIDGET L. FIELD OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL D. CALARCO, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, LYONS (BRUCE A. ROSEKRANS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.



Appeal from an order of the Wayne County Court (Daniel G. Barrett, J.), entered March 6, 2019. The order determined that defendant is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: On appeal from an order determining that he is a level two risk under the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.), defendant contends, and the People correctly concede, that County Court erred in assessing five points against him under risk factor 9, for number and nature of prior crimes. The People failed to prove a prior crime by the requisite clear and convincing evidence (see Correction Law § 168-n [3]; People v Cook, 29 NY3d 121, 125 [2017]) inasmuch as the only evidence of a prior crime consists of "hearsay statements that are vague, inconsistent or equivocal, and otherwise unsubstantiated" (People v Stewart, 61 AD3d 1059, 1060 [3d Dept 2009]; see People v Gonzalez, 28 AD3d 1073, 1074 [4th Dept 2006]; see generally People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 573 [2009]). Nevertheless, the correct total of 75 points would still yield a presumptive level two assessment.

Contrary to defendant's further contention, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's request for a downward departure from his presumptive risk level. We conclude that defendant "failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence the existence of mitigating factors not adequately taken into account by the guidelines" (People v Lewis, 156 AD3d 1431, 1432 [4th Dept 2017], lv denied 31 NY3d 904 [2018]; see People v Gillotti, 23 NY3d 841, 861,

864 [2014]).

Entered: August 20, 2020

Mark W. Bennett

Clerk of the Court