Published on:

Defendant Tries Complex Legal Argument

In New York, the legislature decided that stronger steps had to be taken to ensure that repeat offenders of sex crimes were taken out of the community. A New York DWI Lawyer said that in order to ensure that repeat sex offenders did not recidivate in the community for as long as possible and to ensure that they were given whatever treatment that might be available to ensure that they do not repeat their crimes. This law is the Sex Offender Registration Act. SORA is what it is called for short.

SORA is designed to target sex offenders on their second or third offenses and provides harsher punishments and stricter supervision of these offenders. SORA sets guidelines that must be followed for all sex offenders. If a sex offender is found to have committed a sex offense before, he will most likely be categorized as a level two sex offender. If he has committed a third or subsequent sex offense, or the offenses were of a high and aggravated nature, he can expect to be categorized as a level one offender. Level one offenders are given stiffer sentences and tighter supervision. It is therefore, in a felon’s best interest to attempt to minimize his sentence within the scope of possibility. A New York DWI Lawyer said this would provide him with a greater amount of freedom when he is paroled as well as a shorter prison sentence.

A New York DWI Lawyer said most of these offenders appeal their categorization in an effort to reduce their sentence or their SORA level. One such offender, impressed the court with the scholarly letters that he wrote in an effort to reduce his categorization. He contends that in order for the court to apply a sentence to a non-sentence statute such as SORA, they must use Penal Law §70.3(1) and that to do otherwise would be inaccurate. However, he noted that the first sentencing guidelines statute was created in 1909 as the 1909 Penal Law. He contends that the 1909 Penal Law uses a different system of analysis. The court pointed out that one of the legal points that impressed them about these well written letters was the information regarding the 1909 Penal Law. The court admitted that until reading this man’s letters, they were not even aware that the 1909 Penal Law existed. They also contend that while it brings about an interesting question of law, it would not be correct to use this prior law when assessing a sentence on a person in the modern age.

Clearly, the more recent Penal Law §70.30 is more applicable for modern offenses. The court determined that it would not be correct to bring ineligible sentences that are outlined in the 1909 Penal Law under scrutiny of the 2009 DLRA. A Nassau County DWI Lawyer said the Court stated that the construction of the 2009 DLRA has been affected over the years by the decisions in the court of appeals that is more in sync with the social norms of modern New York citizenry. The 2009 DLRA allows authorization for resentencing Class A-II felony offenders which were not eligible before under the 2005 version of the law.

The defendant’s letter described the 2005 statute as being unnecessarily complicated. This is a view point that is held by many legal experts including the court. The Court failed to be able to determine the relevance of the statement to the current argument. The court contends that the legislature must surely have been aware of the facts that he presents since the Penal Law 70.03 has been in effect for more than 40 years. Although, the court was impressed with the defendant’s ability to interpret and research the law, they determined that it was not applicable to this offender’s situation. His request for resentencing was denied.

At Stephen Bilkis & Associates with its Sex offender Lawyers there are convenient offices throughout New York State and Metropolitan area. Our rape Attorneys can provide you with advice to guide you through difficult situations. Hiring a criminal attorney can prevent you from losing precious time with your family.

Contact Information