People v. Gliatta, 27 A.D.3d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Gliatta, 27 A.D.3d 441 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases · …lack of inhibition and insight into and concern for the inappropriateness of his conduct at p. 442 ⚠ not in text
21 citation events (21 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Treatment trajectory · 2006 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2006 2016 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Hackett
N.Y. App. Div. · 2021 · confidence medium
Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he did not validly waive his right to contest the risk designation recommended by the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders ( see People v Akinpelu, 126 AD3d 1451 , 1451-1452 [4th Dept 2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 912 [2015]; People v Kyle , 64 AD3d 1177 , 1178 [4th Dept 2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 709 [2009]; People v Gliatta , 27 AD3d 441, 441 [2d Dept 2006]) and, in any event, that contention lacks merit.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Huyler
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · confidence medium
In our view, defendant's consent to the classification and designation was knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily given ( see People v Smith , 92 AD3d at 1045-1046 ; People v Costas , 46 AD3d at 476 ; People v Gliatta , 27 AD3d 441, 441 [2006]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. DeWoody
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
An offender’s commission of uncharged sex crimes may constitute an appropriate aggravating factor for purposes of an upward departure if, as here, those uncharged sex crimes have not been accounted for in the Risk Assessment Instrument (see People v Gillotti, 23 NY3d at 858 ; People v Zimmerman, 101 AD3d 1677, 1678 [2012] ; People v Jenkins, 34 AD3d 352, 352 [2006]; People v Seils, 28 AD3d 1158, 1158 [2006]; People v Hammonds, 27 AD3d 441, 442 [2006]; cf. People v Cruz, 111 AD3d 685, 685-686 [2013] ; People v Geier, 56 AD3d 539 , 540-541 [2008]; People v Fredlund, 38 AD3d 636, 636 [2007]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Akinpelu
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
As defendant concedes, however, his contention is unpreserved for our review because he did not assert at the hearing that his due process rights were being violated (see People v Kyle, 64 AD3d 1177, 1178 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 709 [2009]; see also People v Costas, 46 AD3d 475, 476 [2007], lv denied 10 NY3d 716 [2008]; People v Gliatta, 27 AD3d 441, 441 [2006]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Akinpelu
N.Y. App. Div. · 2015 · confidence medium
As defendant concedes, however, his contention is unpreserved for our review because he did not assert at the hearing that his due process rights were being violated (see People v Kyle, 64 AD3d 1177, 1178 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 709 [2009]; see also People v Costas, 46 AD3d 475, 476 [2007], lv denied 10 NY3d 716 [2008]; People v Gliatta, 27 AD3d 441, 441 [2006]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Cruz
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Specifically, the People proffered the defendant’s admission to having sexually abused the victim on one prior occasion (see People v Geier, 56 AD3d 539 [2008]; People v Hammonds, 27 AD3d 441, 442 [2006]), as well as the public and conspicuous nature of the offense, which reflected the defendant’s “lack of inhibition and insight into and concern for the inappropriateness of his conduct” (People v Walker, 105 AD3d 1154, 1155 [2013]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Cruz
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · confidence medium
Specifically, the People proffered the defendant’s admission to having sexually abused the victim on one prior occasion (see People v Geier, 56 AD3d 539 [2008]; People v Hammonds, 27 AD3d 441, 442 [2006]), as well as the public and conspicuous nature of the offense, which reflected the defendant’s “lack of inhibition and insight into and concern for the inappropriateness of his conduct” (People v Walker, 105 AD3d 1154, 1155 [2013]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Fredlund
N.Y. App. Div. · 2007 · confidence medium
Accordingly, the hearing court’s determination to designate the defendant a level three sex offender was provident and supported by clear and convincing evidence (see People v Forney, 28 AD3d 446, 447 [2006]; People v Hammonds, 27 AD3d 441, 442 [2006]; People v White, 25 AD3d 677 [2006]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Leonard P. Gliatta
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Mar 7, 2006.
27 A.D.3d 441
Cited by 12 opinions  |  Published

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), dated December 17, 2003, which designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The defendant, represented by counsel, consented to his designation as a level three sex offender and waived his right to a hearing on the matter (see Correction Law § 168-n). The defendant’s contentions regarding the validity of his waiver are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Dexter, 21 AD3d 403 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 716 [2005]). In any event, we are satisfied that the waiver was knowingly and voluntarily given (see People v Dexter, supra).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are waived, unpreserved for appellate review, based on matters dehors the record, or without merit (see People v Kinchen, 60 NY2d 772 [1983]; People v Spotards, 23 AD3d 586 [2005]; People v Dexter, supra; People v Angelo, 3 AD3d 482 [2004]; People v Tilley, 305 AD2d 1041 [2003]; People v Baker, 303 AD2d 570 [2003]). Florio, J.P., Ritter, Krausman and Covello, JJ., concur.