| People v Washington |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 00547 [91 AD3d 1277] |
| Jnury 31, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Howard B. Washington, Appellant. |
Appeal from an order of the Monroe County Court (Frank P. Geraci, Jr., J.), entered October29, 2010. The order determined that defendant is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex OffenderRegistration Act. It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed withoutcosts. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level two riskpursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law 168 et seq.). Contrary todefendant's contention, County Court's determination that he established a relationship with thevictim for the purpose of victimization is supported by the requisite clear and convincingevidence (see 168-n [3]). "The guidelines assess 20 points if the offender's crime . . . wasdirected at . . . a person with whom a relationship had been established . . . for the primarypurpose of victimization" (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines andCommentary, at 12 [2006]). Here, the record establishes that defendant invited the victim, a13-year-old girl who had run away from home and with whom he had no prior relationship, intohis home and then had sexual intercourse with her several times in the ensuing two days. Thus,the record supports the determination of the court that defendant's primary purpose inestablishing the relationship with the 13-year-old girl was for the purpose of victimizing her (seegenerally People v Carlton, 307 AD2d 763 [2003]). Present Scudder, P.J., Smith, Centra, Lindleyand Gorski, JJ.