Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that the Supreme Court should not have assessed him 20 points under risk factor 5 because the People did not prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the individuals depicted in the child pornography he possessed were between the ages of 11 and 16 (see People v Teagle,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.