People v. Derrick S.
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Rodney J. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- State v. Rodney J. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Clear and convincing evidence supports the finding that respondent is a dangerous sex offender requiring confinement (see Mental Hygiene Law § 10.03 [e]; § 10.07 [f]). He admitted to sexually abusing four girls between the ages of 8 and 11, he has failed to complete any sex offender programs, and both experts testified that he continues to suffer from a cognitive disorder that makes him believe that the victims were attracted to him.
Respondent argues that the State’s expert’s opinion should be given little weight because the expert departed from the results of the STATIC-99R actuarial assessment of the risk of recidivism. The expert’s testimony shows that he considered clinical findings as well as the statistical likelihood of recidivism in determining that respondent requires secure confinement. However, respondent offers no support for his contention that the consideration of clinical factors undermined, rather than enhanced, the expert’s opinion (see e.g. Matter of State of New York v Andrew O., 68 AD3d 1161, 1169 [2009], revd on other grounds 16 NY3d 841 [2011]; State of New York v Frank V., 32 MisC 3d 1217[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51351[U], *3 [2011]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, DeGrasse and Roman, JJ.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.