Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Oneida County (Barry M. Donalty, A.J.), entered August 8, 2011.
Released on November 9, 2012
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
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.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.
The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: On appeal from an order determining that he is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act ([SORA] Correction Law § 168 et seq.), defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in considering unreliable hearsay when making its SORA determination. "Because defendant's evidentiary objection[s] . . . [were] made on a different ground than the unreliable hearsay' ground he raises on appeal, his contention that the court erred in [considering the challenged] evidence is not preserved for our review" (People v Law, 94 AD3d 1561, 1562, lv denied 19 NY3d 809; see People v Wragg, 41 AD3d 1273, 1273-1274, lv denied 9 NY3d 809; People v Smith, 17 AD3d 1045, 1045, lv denied 5 NY3d 705). Entered: November 9, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...