3
Shared Docs
3
Same-Page
3 / 3
Mentions
Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam, JJ. 6081 The People of the State of New York, Ind. 30129/10 Respondent, -against- Jeffrey E. Epstein,
der Registration Act (Correction Law art 6- C), unanimously affirmed, without costs. Clear and convincing evidence, including reliable hearsay (see People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 571 [2009]) supported the assessment of points for risk factors sufficient for a level three sex offender adjudication (Correction L
Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam, JJ. 6081 The People of the State of New York, Ind. 30129/10 Respondent, -against- Jeffrey E. Epstein,
der Registration Act (Correction Law art 6- C), unanimously affirmed, without costs. Clear and convincing evidence, including reliable hearsay (see People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 571 [2009]) supported the assessment of points for risk factors sufficient for a level three sex offender adjudication (Correction L
w § 431. Ibis opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. Decided on November 17, 2011 Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam, JJ. 6081 30129/10 relIThe People of the State of New York, Respondent, V Jeffrey E. Epstein, Defendant-
nder Registration Act (Correction Law art 6-C), unanimously affirmed, without costs. Clear and convincing evidence, including reliable hearsay (see People v Mingo, 12 NY3d 563, 571 [2009]) supported the assessment of points for risk factors sufficient for a level three sex offender adjudication (Correction La
Entities connected to both J.P. and People v Mingo

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
New York City
LOCATIONSweeny
PERSONThe Board
ORGANIZATIONKirkland & Ellis LLP
ORGANIZATION
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr.
PERSON
Bruce Moskowitz
PERSONMingo
LOCATION
Jay Lefkowitz
PERSON
Ruth Pickholz
PERSONAbdus-Salaam
PERSONPeople v Johnson
PERSON
Alexander Acosta
PERSONthe Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders'
ORGANIZATIONThe People of the State of New York
ORGANIZATIONFIRST DEPARTMENT
ORGANIZATIONAPPELLATE DIVISION
ORGANIZATIONPeople v Windham
PERSON