State v. Dennis K.

• Decision Date: 20 August 2014
• Citation: 991 N.Y.S.2d 125,2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 05884,120 A.D.3d 694
• Parties: In the Matter of STATE of New York, respondent, v. DENNIS K. (Anonymous), appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

120 A.D.3d 694
991 N.Y.S.2d 125
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 05884

In the Matter of STATE of New York, respondent,
v.
DENNIS K. (Anonymous), appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Aug. 20, 2014.

[991 N.Y.S.2d 126]

Mental Hygiene Legal Service, Mineola, N.Y. (Michael D. Neville, Timothy M. Riselvato, and Dennis B. Feld of counsel), for appellant.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Richard P. Dearing and Bethany A. Davis Noll of counsel), for respondent.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., REINALDO E. RIVERA, RUTH C. BALKIN and ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.

In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 10 for the civil management of Dennis K., an alleged sex offender requiring civil management, Dennis K. appeals from (1) a decision of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garnett, J.), dated October 11, 2012, made after a hearing, and (2) an order of the same court dated October 11, 2012, which, upon a finding, made after a jury trial, that he suffers from a mental abnormality as defined in Mental Hygiene Law § 10.03(i), and upon a determination, made after a dispositional hearing, that he is currently a dangerous sex offender requiring civil confinement, in effect, granted the petition and directed that he be committed to a secure treatment facility for care and treatment, subject to his right to petition the court for discharge pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law § 10.09 and all other rights provided for by Mental Hygiene Law article 10.

ORDERED that the appeal from the decision is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from a decision ( see Schicchi v. J.A. Green Constr. Corp., 100 A.D.2d 509, 472 N.Y.S.2d 718); and it is further,

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

Contrary to the appellant's contention, the expert testimony that he suffered from “Paraphilia NOS” and Antisocial Personality Disorder was legally sufficient to show that he suffered from a “mental abnormality”

[991 N.Y.S.2d 127]

as defined by Mental Hygiene Law § 10.03(i), under the circumstances herein ( see Matter of State of New York v. Shannon S., 20 N.Y.3d 99, 104–105, 107, 956 N.Y.S.2d 462, 980 N.E.2d 510; Matter of State of New York v. Kenneth T., 106 A.D.3d 829, 964 N.Y.S.2d 593, lv. granted21 N.Y.3d 863, 2013 WL 4562831; see also Matter of State of New York v. Terry P., 109 A.D.3d 934, 971 N.Y.S.2d 456; Matter of State of New York v. Alfredo M., 96 A.D.3d 1068, 1069, 947 N.Y.S.2d 594; Matter of...