People v Mosley
2013 NY Slip Op 03825 [106 AD3d 1067]
May 29, 2013
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, June 26, 2013


The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Tayquan Mosley, Appellant.

[*1]Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Joshua M. Levine of counsel), forappellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and LindaBreen of counsel; G. Aaron Leibowitz on the brief), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County(DiMango, J.), dated November 30, 2011, which, after a hearing, designated him a levelthree sexually violent offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The defendant contends that the Supreme Court, in determining his risk level underthe Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C; hereinafter SORA),erroneously assessed 10 points under risk factor 12 for failure to accept responsibility forhis criminal conduct. During his interview with the Probation Department, the defendantclaimed he was innocent and had pleaded guilty only for the sake of expediency becausehe had been in jail too long. Although, two weeks later, the defendant formally admittedhis guilt in response to questioning by the Supreme Court at the sentencing proceeding,the defendant's contradictory statements, considered together, do not reflect a genuineacceptance of responsibility as required by the SORA Risk Assessment Guidelines(see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines andCommentary at 15-16 [2006]; People v Farrice, 100 AD3d 976, 977 [2012]; People v Perry, 85 AD3d890 [2011]; People vVega, 79 AD3d 718, 719 [2010]; People v Ferrer, 69 AD3d 513, 515 [2010]).

Thus, contrary to the defendant's contention, the People demonstrated, through "clearand convincing evidence" (Correction Law § 168-n [3]), that he failed to acceptresponsibility for his criminal conduct. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properlyassessed 10 points under risk factor 12, and properly designated the defendant a levelthree sexually violent offender. Angiolillo, J.P., Hall, Roman and Hinds-Radix, JJ.,concur.


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.