| People v Deturris |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 09104 [90 AD3d 727] |
| December 13, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of State of New York, Respondent, v StevenDeturris, Appellant. |
—[*1] Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Michael J. Brennan of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County (Kahn J.), datedJanuary 10, 2011, which, after a hearing, designated him a level two sex offender pursuant toCorrection Law article 6-C.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The County Court's designation of the defendant as a level two sex offender under the SexOffender Registration Act (hereinafter SORA) was supported by clear and convincing evidence(see Correction Law art 6-C; People v Dong V. Dao, 9 AD3d 401, 401-402 [2004]). Contrary tothe defendant's contention, the County Court properly assessed 15 points, under risk factor 11,for a history of drug abuse (see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk AssessmentGuidelines and Commentary, at 15 [2006]; People v Guitard, 57 AD3d 751, 752 [2008]). The facts ascontained in the presentence report, which was offered by the People at the SORA hearing,provided a sufficient basis for the assessment of those 15 points (see People v Smith, 78 AD3d 917,918 [2010]; see also People vGuitard, 57 AD3d 751 [2008]; cf. People v Mabee, 69 AD3d 820 [2010]). In addition, this sameevidence, along with the risk assessment instrument, as well as the defendant's own testimony atthe SORA hearing, demonstrated that the defendant had not accepted responsibility for hisconduct (see People v Garcia, 56AD3d 539 [2008]; People vAlvarez, 49 AD3d 704 [2008]; People v Lawless, 44 AD3d 738 [2007]). Therefore, the defendantwas also properly assessed 10 points under risk assessment instrument risk factor 12,"Acceptance of Responsibility."
Consequently, the determination of the County Court to uphold the 75 points which theBoard ascribed to the defendant in the risk assessment instrument, and to designate the defendanta level two offender, should not be disturbed (see People v Pardo, 50 AD3d 992 [2008]). Mastro, A.P.J., Hall,Sgroi and Cohen, JJ., concur.