Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Rodriguez

NEW YORK SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT


November 24, 2009

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,
v.
JULIO RODRIGUEZ, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eduardo Padro, J.), entered on or about October 9, 2007, which adjudicated defendant a level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Sweeny, J.P., Buckley, Catterson, Acosta, Freedman, JJ.

674/99

Since defendant, having absconded from parole supervision, is not presently available to obey the mandate of the court, he has forfeited his right to appeal (see e.g. People v Law, 12 AD3d 192 [2004]). Although a SORA appeal is a civil appeal, this principle is similarly applicable (see e.g. Wechsler v Wechsler, 45 AD3d 470, 472 [2007]).

This appeal is without merit in any event. Defendant advances the argument that his underlying guilty plea to two counts of rape in the first degree should be viewed as "incest rather than a conventional sex crime against a child." This view of the underlying crimes, defendant urges, would demonstrate that defendant is far less likely to "recidivate" (sic) because defendant has "run out of family victims."

This argument is wholly bereft of evidentiary support in the record, relies on purported evidence submitted for the first time on appeal, and is repugnant to common decency, the plain language of the statute, and precedent in this Department. Even if we were to accept defendant's contention that the recidivist rate for incest child molesters is somewhat lower than that for other presumably more common child molesters, we would nonetheless decline to consider a discretionary downward departure.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

20091124

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.