| People v Ratcliff |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 04292 [107 AD3d 476] |
| June 11, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Ronald Ratcliff, Appellant. |
—[*1] Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Sheryl Feldman of counsel), forrespondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Renee A. White, J.), entered on or aboutSeptember 6, 2011, which adjudicated defendant a level two sexually violent offenderpursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimouslyaffirmed, without costs.
The record supports the court's discretionary upward departure. "[T]he levelsuggested by the [risk assessment instrument] is merely presumptive and a SORA courtpossesses the discretion to impose a lower or higher risk level if it concludes that thefactors in the RAI do not result in an appropriate designation" (People v Mingo, 12 NY3d563, 568 n 2 [2009]; seealso People v Johnson, 11 NY3d 416, 421 [2008]). Here, even though defendantwas assessed the maximum amount of points under the risk factors for use of violenceand sexual contact, the RAI did not adequately account for the extreme egregiousness ofdefendant's conduct (see e.g. People v Guasp, 95 AD3d 608 [1st Dept 2012], lvdenied 19 NY3d 812 [2012]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz,Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.