In the Matter of State v. Anonymous
| Decision Date | 29 March 2011 |
| Parties | In the Matter of STATE of New York, respondent,v.ANONYMOUS, et al., appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
82 A.D.3d 1250
920 N.Y.S.2d 195
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 02686
In the Matter of STATE of New York, respondent,
v.
ANONYMOUS, et al., appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
March 29, 2011.
[920 N.Y.S.2d 196]
Steven A. Feldman, Uniondale, N.Y. (Arza Feldman of counsel), for appellant.Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Benjamin N. Gutman and Richard O. Jackson of counsel), for respondent.JOSEPH COVELLO, J.P., L. PRISCILLA HALL, PLUMMER E. LOTT, and JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.
[82 A.D.3d 1250] In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 10 for the civil management of Anonymous, an alleged sex offender allegedly suffering from a mental abnormality and requiring civil management, Anonymous appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Pitts, J.), dated October 15, 2009, which, upon a jury verdict finding that he suffers from a mental abnormality as defined in Mental Hygiene Law § 10.03(i), and a determination made after a dispositional hearing that he currently is a dangerous sex offender requiring civil confinement, granted the petition and directed that he be committed to a secure treatment facility for care and treatment.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The State of New York commenced this proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 10, also known as the Sex Offender Management and Treatment Act (hereinafter SOMTA), for the civil management of Anonymous (hereinafter the appellant), an alleged sex offender allegedly suffering from a mental abnormality and requiring civil management. After certain other procedural steps, not at issue on this appeal, the Supreme Court conducted a jury trial, and a unanimous jury found that the appellant suffers from a “mental abnormality,” as that phrase is defined in SOMTA ( see Mental Hygiene Law §§ 10.07[c], [d]; see also Mental Hygiene Law § 10.03[g], [i] ).
Thereafter, the Supreme Court conducted a dispositional hearing, after which it found that the mental abnormality from which the appellant suffers involves such a strong predisposition to commit sex offenses, and such an inability to control behavior, that he is likely to be a danger to others and to commit sex offenses if he is not confined to a secure treatment facility ( see Mental Hygiene Law § 10.07[f] ). Based on that finding, the Supreme Court made the mandatory dispositional determination that the appellant is a dangerous sex offender...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Carl S.
...Law § 10.08[b] ; Matter of State of New York v. Robert F., 101 A.D.3d 1133, 1135, 958 N.Y.S.2d 156 ; Matter of State of New York v. Anonymous, 82 A.D.3d 1250, 1251, 920 N.Y.S.2d 195 ; Matter of State of New York v. Wilkes, 77 A.D.3d at 1453, 907 N.Y.S.2d 903 ).Contrary to the appellant's co......
-
State v. Abdul A., 2013-09692
...challenge, for cause, to a prospective juror (see CPL 270.20[1] [b] ; Mental Hygiene Law § 10.07[b] ; Matter of State of New York v. Anonymous, 82 A.D.3d 1250, 1251, 920 N.Y.S.2d 195 ; People v. Harris, 247 A.D.2d 630, 631–632, 669 N.Y.S.2d 355 ; People v. Davis, 221 A.D.2d 653, 635 N.Y.S.2......
-
State v. Joseph McD.
...offenses if not confined to a secure treatment facility ( seeMental Hygiene Law § 10.07 [f]; Matter of State of New York v. Anonymous, 82 A.D.3d 1250, 1252, 920 N.Y.S.2d 195). Accordingly, upon that determination, the Supreme Court did not err in determining that the appellant is a dangerou......
-
State v. Los
...weight of the evidence, as they were supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence ( see generally Matter of State of New York v. Anonymous, 82 A.D.3d 1250, 1251, 920 N.Y.S.2d 195;Matter of State of New York v. Derrick B., 68 A.D.3d 1124, 1126, 892 N.Y.S.2d 140). However, the inclusion......
-
The admissibility of expert opinion and the bases of expert opinion in sex offender civil management trials in New York.
...2011). (97) See, e.g., State v. Mark S., 87 A.D.3d 73, 77-78, 924 N.Y.S.2d 661, 664-65 (App. Div. 3d Dep't 2011); State v. Anonymous, 82 A.D.3d 1250, 1251, 920 N.Y.S.2d 195, 197 (App. Div. 2d Dep't 2011); State v. Pierce, 79 A.D.3d 1779, 1780, 914 N.Y.S.2d 547, 548-49 (App. Div. 4th Dep't 2......