New York Court of Appeals, 2014

People v. Moss

New York Court of Appeals · Decided February 13, 2014 · Abdus, Graffeo, Lippman, Pigott, Read, Rivera, Salaam, Smith

22 N.Y.3d 1094; 5 N.E.3d 26

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Edmonds (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
People v. Edmonds (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
The People v. Christopher J. Weber (N.Y. 2023)
People v. Scone (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
EDMONDS, KENNETH G., PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
MOORE, WILLIAM J., PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
People v. Moore (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
People v. Moore (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the matter remitted to Supreme Court for further proceedings in accordance with this memorandum.

Both Supreme Court and the Appellate Division (107 AD3d 1574 [2013]) failed to articulate a proper legal basis for adjudicating the defendant a risk level three sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq.). As conceded by the People, no basis in law exists for Supreme Court’s or the Appellate Division’s conclusion that an automatic override increased defendant’s presumptive risk level two designation to risk level three (see Sex Offender Registration Act: Risk Assessment Guidelines and Commentary at 3-4 [2006]). Both of the courts below having erred in concluding defendant is a presumptive risk level three offender, we remit to Supreme Court for further proceedings.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, without costs, and case remitted to Supreme Court, Monroe County, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.