The New York Appellate Division recently upheld the designation of Franklin Cuenca as a level two sex offender. This decision, made on October 7, 2026, affects Cuenca's registration under the Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA) and has implications for his future interactions within the community.

The case arose after Cuenca was convicted of sexual conduct against a child in the second degree. The court's ruling confirms the importance of the risk assessment process in determining how sex offenders are classified and monitored in New York.

Background

The People of the State of New York were the respondents in this case, while Franklin Cuenca served as the appellant. Cuenca faced serious charges after pleading guilty to a crime involving sexual conduct with a minor. Following his conviction, a hearing was held to assess his risk level under SORA, which is designed to evaluate the potential risk of reoffense and the danger posed to the community.

The hearing took place in October 2020, where the court assessed Cuenca and assigned him 75 points on the risk assessment instrument. This score placed him in the presumptive risk level two category. Cuenca sought a downward departure from this designation, arguing that he should be classified as a level one sex offender instead.

To support his request for a lower designation, Cuenca needed to demonstrate mitigating factors that would suggest a lower likelihood of reoffense. However, the court found that he did not meet the required burden of proof to justify this request.

The Ruling

The court ruled that Cuenca's application for a downward departure from the presumptive risk level was denied. The judges involved in this ruling included Colleen D. Duffy, Paul Wooten, Helen Voutsinas, and James P. McCormack.

The court stated, "The defendant failed to sustain his burden of proof in support of his application for a downward departure from the presumptive risk level." This conclusion was based on the assessment that Cuenca's acceptance of responsibility and the nature of the crime had already been adequately considered in the guidelines.

Moreover, the court emphasized that Cuenca's claims of a lack of force or violence during the crime did not warrant a lower designation. The judges noted that the factors he presented, including his lack of prior criminal history, were not sufficient to change the court's decision.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for Cuenca and others in similar situations. By affirming the level two designation, the court reinforces the criteria used to assess sex offenders under SORA. This decision highlights the importance of the risk assessment process and the need for defendants to provide compelling evidence when seeking a lower risk designation.

Cuenca's case illustrates the challenges faced by individuals labeled as sex offenders. The designation impacts their registration requirements and can influence their ability to find employment or housing. The court's decision underscores the seriousness of sexual offenses and the state's commitment to protecting the community.

What's Next

It is unclear if Cuenca plans to appeal this decision. The court's ruling is final unless challenged in a higher court. There are no related cases pending that were mentioned in the court filing.