People v Birch

Annotate this Case
People v Birch 2012 NY Slip Op 06565 Decided on October 2, 2012 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on October 2, 2012
Friedman, J.P., Acosta, Renwick, Richter, Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
8163 627/01

[*1]The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

v

Kyle Birch, Defendant-Appellant.




Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Nancy E.
Little of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Martin J.
Foncello of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Juan M. Merchan, J.), entered on or about January 19, 2011, which adjudicated defendant a level three sexually violent offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly assessed 15 points under the risk factor for drug or alcohol abuse, because defendant's crimes were committed while under the influence of drugs and alcohol, and the evidence of such use was not excessively remote. Defendant's "abstinence," while incarcerated, from using substances that are prohibited in prison was insufficient to predict his postrelease behavior (see People v Gonzalez, 48 AD3d 284, 285 [2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 711 [2008]).

The court properly assessed 20 points under the risk factor for unsatisfactory conduct, including sexual misconduct, while confined. Defendant's prison disciplinary record provided clear and convincing evidence that he repeatedly engaged in lewd behavior directed at female personnel.

Regardless of whether points should have been assessed under the risk factor for failure to accept responsibility, defendant would still be a level three offender, and we find no basis for a discretionary downward departure to level two (see People v Pettigrew, 14 NY3d 406, 409 [2010]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: OCTOBER 2, 2012

CLERK

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.