People v Pullins

Annotate this Case
People v Pullins 2016 NY Slip Op 03150 Decided on April 27, 2016 Appellate Division, Second 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 April 27, 2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
SANDRA L. SGROI
ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.
2014-06097

[*1]People of State of New York, respondent,

v

Kaysheem Pullins, appellant.



Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, NY (Bonnie C. Brennan of counsel), for appellant.

Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, NY (Leonard Joblove and Morgan J. Dennehy of counsel; Craig Marinaro on the brief), for respondent.



DECISION & ORDER

Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Guzman, J.), dated June 5, 2014, which, after a hearing, designated him a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C.

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

By order dated June 5, 2014, the Supreme Court, after a hearing, designated the defendant a level three sex offender pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C. The defendant appeals.

The Supreme Court did not err in assessing points to the defendant based on his youthful offender adjudication (see People v Scott, 136 AD3d 675; People v Francis, 137 AD3d 91). Further, the court did not err in assessing points to the defendant based on his sexual misconduct while incarcerated. Moreover, the court properly determined that the defendant was not entitled to a downward departure (see People v Wortham, 119 AD3d 666). Accordingly, the court properly designated the defendant a level three sex offender.

MASTRO, J.P., LEVENTHAL, SGROI and MILLER, JJ., concur.

ENTER: Aprilanne Agostino Clerk of the Court

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.