| People v Lewis |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 08620 [45 AD3d 1381] |
| November 9, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronald Lewis,Appellant. |
—[*1] Michael C. Green, District Attorney, Rochester (Nancy A. Gilligan of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Kenneth R. Fisher, J.), enteredNovember 15, 2005. The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the SexOffender Registration Act.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimouslyaffirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level three riskpursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.).Contrary to the contention of the defendant, Supreme Court's determination to classify him inaccordance with his presumptive classification as a level three risk is supported by the requisiteclear and convincing evidence (see § 168-n [3]), including evidence of his sexualmisconduct with the victim, his use of violence, and his lengthy criminal history, including hisconviction of a felony five years before the instant conviction of attempted sexual abuse in thefirst degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 130.65). Defendant also previously had beenplaced in juvenile detention for sexual misconduct. Contrary to defendant's further contention,the court properly considered the case summary and the presentence report, which constitutereliable hearsay, in determining defendant's risk level (see People v Woods, 41 AD3d 1299 [2007], lv denied 9NY3d 809 [2007]; People vVacanti, 26 AD3d 732 [2006], lv denied 6 NY3d 714 [2006]). We rejectdefendant's further contention that the People failed to establish a basis for the assessment of 20points under risk factor 7, i.e., "[r]elationship with victim." The People presented evidenceestablishing that the victim met defendant for the first time only a few hours before the incident,did not know his legal name, and knew no other personal information about him. "Thus, the courtproperly concluded that 'defendant was a stranger to the victim' " (People v Gaines, 39 AD3d 1212,1213 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 803 [2007]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Gorski,Centra, Fahey and Green, JJ.