People v Wood
Annotate this CaseDecided on December 4, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
MARK C. DILLON, J.P.
DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO
SHERI S. ROMAN
SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.
2012-03402
[*1]People of State of New York, respondent,
v
Steven Wood, appellant.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Joshua M. Levine of counsel),
for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard
Joblove, Morgan J. Dennehy, and
Daniel Berman of counsel), for
respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Sullivan J.), dated April 4, 2012, which, after a hearing pursuant to Correction Law article 6-C, designated him a level two sex offender.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
A departure from the presumptive risk level is warranted where "there exists an aggravating or mitigating factor of a kind, or to a degree, that is otherwise not adequately taken into account by the guidelines" (Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 4 [2006]; see People v Wyatt, 89 AD3d 112, 119; People v Bussie, 83 AD3d 920, 920-921). Here, the Supreme Court properly determined that the defendant was not entitled to a downward departure and, thus, properly designated him as a level two sex offender (see People v Wyatt, 89 AD3d at 131; People v Mondo, 88 AD3d 676; People v Padro, 84 AD3d 1046).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
DILLON, J.P., ANGIOLILLO, ROMAN and SGROI, 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.