Rabinowitz v. James M.Rabinowitz v. James M.
A fair interpretation of the evidence supports the application court‘s findings that while defendant continues to suffer from a mental illness, he no longer shows a level of dangerousness warranting retention in a secure facility, and that he otherwise meets the criteria for retention in a nonsecure facility (see Matter of David B., 97 NY2d 267, 276-279 [2002]; Matter of George L., 85 NY2d 295, 305 [1995]; cf. Matter of Richard S., 6 AD3d 1039 [2004], appeal dismissed 3 NY3d 700 [2004]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.