| People v Rotterman |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 04565 [96 AD3d 1467] |
| June 8, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Fourth Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v MichaelRotterman, Appellant. |
—[*1] Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Matthew B. Powers of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from an order of the Erie County Court (Kenneth F. Case, J.), entered June 3, 2011.The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex OffenderRegistration Act.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level three riskpursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act ([SORA] Correction Law § 168 etseq.). Contrary to defendant's contention, County Court complied with the statutory mandateto set forth "the findings of fact and conclusions of law on which the determination[ is] based"(§ 168-n [3]; see People vCarter, 35 AD3d 1023, 1023-1024 [2006], lv denied 8 NY3d 810 [2007]). Wereject defendant's further contention that the People failed to present clear and convincingevidence to support the assessment of 30 points against him for being armed with a dangerousinstrument during the commission of one of the underlying crimes. That assessment is supportedby the reliable hearsay contained in the case summary and the presentence report (see People v Thompson, 66 AD3d1455, 1456 [2009], lv denied 13 NY3d 714 [2009]; see generally People v Mingo, 12NY3d 563, 573 [2009]). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that adownward departure from his presumptive risk level was warranted (see People v Quinones, 91 AD3d1302, 1303 [2012]). Finally, we reject defendant's contention that he was denied effectiveassistance of counsel at the SORA hearing (see People v Bowles, 89 AD3d 171, 181 [2011], lv denied18 NY3d 807 [2012]). Present—Scudder, P.J., Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Sconiers, JJ.