People v. Guasp
Cases that cite this one
14 later published cases cite this decision.
- People v. Wilkerson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
- People v. Skipper (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- People v. Gonzalez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- People v. Gonzalez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- People v. Escobar (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- People v. Shim (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Pavia (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- People v. Sorto (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- People v. Simmons (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Fultz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- People v. Ratcliff (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- People v. Ratcliff (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- People v. Majid (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
- People v. Majid (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
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
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Thomas Farber, J.), entered on or about July 27, 2010, which adjudicated defendant a level two sex offender pursuant to 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. This was established by the results of a screening test for alcoholism and defendant’s admissions to corrections officials regarding his drug use (see e.g. People v Johnson, 77 AD3d 548 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 705 [2011]).
In any event, regardless of whether defendant’s correct point score was 55, as he claims, or 70, as the court found, the record supports the court’s discretionary upward departure to level two. The court properly determined that although defendant received points relating to the facts of the underlying sex crime, the risk assessment instrument failed to adequately take into account the crime’s unusual brutality and heinous quality (see e.g. People v Miller, 48 AD3d 774 [2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 711 [2008]; People v Sanford, 47 AD3d 454 [2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 707 [2008]). These aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating factors cited by defendant. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.