People v Robertson
2012 NY Slip Op 08947 [101 AD3d 1671]
December 21, 2012
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
As corrected through Wednesday, February 6, 2013


The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Keegan Robertson,Appellant.

[*1]J. Scott Porter, Seneca Falls, for defendant-appellant.

Barry Porsch, District Attorney, Waterloo, for respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Seneca County Court (W. Patrick Falvey, A.J.), entered October 31,2011. 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 risk pursuant tothe Sex Offender Registration Act ([SORA] Correction Law § 168 et seq.). We rejectdefendant's contention that County Court erred in assessing 30 points against him under risk factor 3,for having three or more victims. "[I]t is well settled that, in determining the number of victims forSORA purposes, the hearing court is not limited to the crime of which defendant was convicted" (People v Gardiner, 92 AD3d 1228,1229 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 801 [2012]). Here, the court properly considered "reliablehearsay evidence," including defendant's statements to the police, in determining the number of victims(§ 168-n [3]; see People vChristie, 94 AD3d 1263, 1263 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 808 [2012]).

The court also properly denied defendant's request for a downward departure from hispresumptive risk level based upon his young age at the time of the underlying offenses. A departurefrom the presumptive risk level is warranted where "there exists an aggravating or mitigating factor of akind, or to a degree, that is otherwise not adequately taken into account by the [risk assessment]guidelines" (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 4 [2006];see People v Cummings, 81 AD3d1261, 1262 [2011], lv denied 16 NY3d 711 [2011]). Here, the guidelines adequatelyaddressed defendant's age when he committed his first sex crime, and the court properly assessed 10points under risk factor 8 because, at age 20 or less, he committed a sex offense that resulted in anadjudication or a conviction of a sex crime. Present—Scudder, P.J., Fahey, Carni, Lindley andSconiers, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.