People v. Sam

Nov 17, 2009
Versions:67 A.D.3d 876
888 N.Y.S.2d 434

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

The defendant failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that there existed a mitigating factor of a kind or to a degree not otherwise taken into account by the guidelines (see People v Jacobs, 61 AD3d 835 [2009]; People v Serrano, 61 AD3d 946, 947 [2009]; People v Abdullah, 31 AD3d 515, 516 [2006]). The factors relied upon by the defendant, alcohol abuse and his relationship with the victim, are expressly addressed in the SORA guidelines (see People v Perez, 61 AD3d 946 [2009]; People v Townsend, 60 AD3d 655 [2009]). The County Court appropriately designated the defendant a level two sex offender and providently exercised its discretion in denying his request for a downward departure. Fisher, J.P., Angiolillo, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.