New York Law Watch
Sex Offender Registration: 2026 decisions
Sex offender registration proceedings are filed here, including decisions reviewing risk levels, departures and the evidence supporting classification.
For Sex Offender Registration, 2026 decisions, Law Watch lists 22 indexable decisions dated July 24, 2026 to November 10, 2026 across 10 decision weeks.
24 decision records: 22 meet the substance floor; 2 records are held from search listings.
Week ending November 14, 2026
Browse the week ending November 14, 2026
- People v Canady2026 NY Slip Op 06556
The court affirmed the defendant’s designation as a level three sexually violent offender, rejecting the argument that age-based risk factors should be ignored based on scientific research. Although the lower court’s findings were insufficient, the upward departure was justified by the severity of the defendant’s conduct, including rape and murder.
Week ending November 7, 2026
Browse the week ending November 7, 2026
- People v Lopez2026 NY Slip Op 06531
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to adjudicate the defendant a level two sexually violent offender, finding that the court providently exercised its discretion in denying a downward departure. The court determined that the mitigating factors cited by the defendant were adequately considered by the risk assessment instrument and did not warrant an exceptional response.
- People v Dreyer2026 NY Slip Op 06471
The County Court properly designated the defendant a level two sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act. The court affirmed the assessment of points for risk factors 5 and 7, finding that the People established the victims’ ages and the nature of the relationship by clear and convincing evidence.
Week ending October 31, 2026
Browse the week ending October 31, 2026
- People v Lopez2026 NY Slip Op 06336
The appellate court affirmed the defendant’s designation as a level two sex offender, finding that his argument for a downward departure was unpreserved because he did not request it at the hearing. Additionally, the court determined that the defendant failed to establish that a downward departure was warranted based on the risk assessment points.
- People v Call2026 NY Slip Op 06335
The Appellate Division reversed the defendant’s designation as a level three sex offender and designated him a level two sex offender because the People failed to prove aggravating circumstances warranting an upward departure. The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s application for a downward departure, finding that the substantial age disparity between the parties warranted maintaining the presumptive risk level.
Week ending October 24, 2026
Browse the week ending October 24, 2026
- People v Silver2026 NY Slip Op 06220
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to adjudicate the defendant a level two sexually violent offender, finding that the court properly declined to grant a downward departure. The court determined that the risk assessment instrument adequately accounted for the defendant’s mitigating factors, which were outweighed by the egregiousness of the underlying child abuse offense.
- People v Sanchez2026 NY Slip Op 06152
The court affirmed the defendant’s level two sex offender designation and the denial of a downward departure, but modified the order to remove the sexually violent offender designation. The court found that the evidence sufficiently supported the risk assessment points and that the significant age disparity between the parties precluded a downward departure based on the victim’s lack of consent.
Week ending October 17, 2026
Browse the week ending October 17, 2026
- People v Canty2026 NY Slip Op 06025
The Appellate Division affirmed the SORA court’s decision to adjudicate the defendant a level two sexually violent offender, finding no abuse of discretion in denying a downward departure. The court determined that the defendant’s treatment participation and other mitigating factors did not outweigh the egregiousness of the underlying offenses.
- People v Berta2026 NY Slip Op 05983
The court affirmed the designation of the defendant as a level three sex offender, finding that he failed to establish that his age or health issues warranted a downward departure from the presumptive risk level. The appellate court determined that the defendant did not demonstrate that these factors resulted in an overassessment of his risk to public safety.
- People v Anaya2026 NY Slip Op 05913
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s petition to modify his sex offender classification, finding that mitigating factors were outweighed by the seriousness of the offense and recidivism. The defendant failed to establish that his age, health, or family support reduced his likelihood of reoffense.
Week ending October 10, 2026
Browse the week ending October 10, 2026
- People v Cuenca2026 NY Slip Op 05816
The court affirmed the designation of the defendant as a level two sex offender, finding that he failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that his response to treatment was exceptional or that other mitigating factors warranted a downward departure from the presumptive risk level.
- People v O’Connor2026 NY Slip Op 05743
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s petition to modify his sex offender classification, finding that the conditions had not changed sufficiently to warrant a modification of his risk level three status. The court determined that the defendant’s mitigating factors were largely present at the initial adjudication and did not outweigh the seriousness of his underlying conviction and history of repeated sexual misconduct.
Week ending October 3, 2026
Browse the week ending October 3, 2026
- People v Lebron2026 NY Slip Op 05499
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to adjudicate the defendant a level two sexually violent offender, rejecting the argument for a downward departure to level one. The court determined that the mitigating factors presented were either already accounted for by the risk assessment instrument or were outweighed by the heinous nature of the crime against a child.
- People v Miranda2026 NY Slip Op 05491
The court affirmed the adjudication of the defendant as a level two sexually violent offender, finding that the trial court properly declined a downward departure. The appellate court determined that the defendant’s mitigating factors, including treatment completion and health issues, were adequately accounted for by the risk assessment and outweighed by the seriousness of his conduct.
Week ending September 26, 2026
Browse the week ending September 26, 2026
- People v Melter2026 NY Slip Op 05429
The County Court properly designated the defendant a level two sex offender because his request for a downward departure was unpreserved for appellate review. Furthermore, the court found that a downward departure was not warranted as the mitigating factors were already accounted for in his risk score.
Week ending September 19, 2026
Browse the week ending September 19, 2026
- People v Edwards2026 NY Slip Op 05329
The court affirmed the designation of the defendant as a level three sex offender, finding that the County Court properly assessed points for continuous sexual misconduct and substance abuse. The defendant failed to meet the burden of proof required to sustain an application for a downward departure from the presumptive risk level.
Week ending July 25, 2026
Browse the week ending July 25, 2026
- People v Gutschow2026 NY Slip Op 04718
The court affirmed the determination that the defendant is a level two risk under the Sex Offender Registration Act. The appellate court found that the People established by clear and convincing evidence that aggravating circumstances, including a large quantity of child sexual abuse material and self-reported addiction, justified an upward departure from the presumptive risk level.
- People v Berry2026 NY Slip Op 04705
The court affirmed the lower court’s decision to reduce the defendant’s risk level from three to two based on evidence of rehabilitation, but denied the request to reduce it to level one because the defendant failed to meet the clear and convincing evidence standard. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion in considering the nature of the offenses and the defendant’s recent release from prison.
- People v Gehm2026 NY Slip Op 04704
The appeal is dismissed because the record is insufficient for meaningful review as the defendant failed to include the risk assessment instrument and case summary. Additionally, the defendant’s challenge to specific risk factors is academic because he would still qualify as a level two risk even without the disputed points.
- People v Castaneda2026 NY Slip Op 04703
The court affirmed the determination that the defendant was a level three risk and a sexually violent offender under SORA. The court rejected the defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims, finding that a downward departure was unlikely to succeed and that the defendant waived the communication claim by proceeding without an adjournment.
- People v Domingo-Nolasco2026 NY Slip Op 04693
The court affirmed the determination that the defendant was a level two risk under the Sex Offender Registration Act. The appellate court found that the People provided clear and convincing evidence that the victim was a stranger to the defendant, justifying the assessment of additional points under risk factor 7.
- People v Covello2026 NY Slip Op 04578
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s determination that the defendant is a level three risk under the Sex Offender Registration Act. The court found that any potential due process violation regarding the denial of an adjournment was harmless because the defendant’s prior conviction independently warranted an override to a level three risk.
Also decided
- People v Lema-Curillo 2026 NY Slip Op 06151 October 21, 2026
- PEOPLE v COLLIER 45 NY3d 611 January 8, 2026