What did the court decide?

The Appellate Division affirmed the county court's decision classifying Mr. Watros as a Level Two sex offender under New York's SORA.

Who is affected by this decision?

The defendant, Alexander R. Watros, is directly affected because the Level Two classification governs his registration and related restrictions; the decision also upholds public notification measures tied to that level.

What happens next for the defendant?

Because the appellate court affirmed, the defendant remains subject to Level Two registration and notification requirements under SORA unless he pursues further appellate relief.

Can this decision be appealed further?

Yes; the defendant may seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, but the Appellate Division's unanimous affirmation means further review is discretionary and not guaranteed.

People v. Watros

Docket 382 KA 25-00933

Court of record · Indexed in NoticeRegistry archive · AI-enriched for research

Criminal AppealAffirmed

Filed: Apr 24, 2026 · 1 week ago
Jurisdiction: New York
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Type: Opinion
Case type: Criminal Appeal
Disposition: Affirmed
Citation: 2026 NY Slip Op 02578
Docket: 382 KA 25-00933

Appeal from an order of the Oswego County Court determining the defendant is a Level Two risk under the Sex Offender Registration Act

Summary

The Appellate Division, Fourth Department unanimously affirmed a March 28, 2025 Oswego County Court order classifying defendant Alexander R. Watros as a Level Two sex offender under New York's Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA). The court reviewed the county court's risk-level determination and found no basis to disturb it. Because the Appellate Division affirmed, the Level Two classification and its attendant registration and community-notification requirements remain in effect.

Issues Decided

Whether the county court erred in assessing and assigning the defendant a Level Two risk classification under the Sex Offender Registration Act
Whether the record supports the factors used to determine the defendant's risk level

Court's Reasoning

The appellate court concluded the lower court's SORA risk-level determination was supported by the record and the applicable statutory framework, and there was no reversible error in applying the risk-assessment factors. Because the county court properly considered the required evidence and criteria, the appellate court had no basis to change the classification. The unanimous decision reflects deference to the trial court's factual findings and application of the SORA scheme.

Authorities Cited

Sex Offender Registration Act (SORA)

Parties

Appellant: Alexander R. Watros
Respondent: The People of the State of New York
Attorney: Bradley E. Keem (for defendant-appellant)
Attorney: Amy L. Hallenbeck (for respondent)
Judge: Armen J. Nazarian (Oswego County Court)
Judge: Whalen, P.J.
Judge: Bannister, J.
Judge: Montour, J.
Judge: Nowak, J.
Judge: Hannah, J.

Key Dates

County Court order date: 2025-03-28
Appellate Division decision date: 2026-04-24

What You Should Do Next

1
Consider seeking leave to appeal
If the defense wishes to continue, they can file an application for leave to appeal to the New York Court of Appeals within the applicable deadline and with legal counsel.
2
Comply with SORA requirements
The defendant should ensure compliance with all Level Two registration and reporting obligations to avoid further criminal penalties.
3
Consult counsel about post-conviction options
Defense counsel can advise whether there are any preserved legal issues, procedural grounds, or factual developments that might support further relief or a motion to modify classification.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the court decide?: The Appellate Division affirmed the county court's decision classifying Mr. Watros as a Level Two sex offender under New York's SORA.
Who is affected by this decision?: The defendant, Alexander R. Watros, is directly affected because the Level Two classification governs his registration and related restrictions; the decision also upholds public notification measures tied to that level.
What happens next for the defendant?: Because the appellate court affirmed, the defendant remains subject to Level Two registration and notification requirements under SORA unless he pursues further appellate relief.
Can this decision be appealed further?: Yes; the defendant may seek leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, but the Appellate Division's unanimous affirmation means further review is discretionary and not guaranteed.

The above suggestions and answers are AI-generated for informational purposes only. They may contain errors. NoticeRegistry assumes no responsibility for their accuracy. Consult a qualified attorney before relying on them.

Full Filing Text

People v Watros - 2026 NY Slip Op 02578

People v Watros

2026 NY Slip Op 02578

April 24, 2026

Appellate Division, Fourth Department

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

v

ALEXANDER R. WATROS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

Decided on April 24, 2026

382 KA 25-00933

Present: Whalen, P.J., Bannister, Montour, Nowak, And Hannah, JJ.

KEEM APPEALS, PLLC, SYRACUSE (BRADLEY E. KEEM OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

ANTHONY J. DIMARTINO, JR., DISTRICT ATTORNEY, OSWEGO (AMY L. HALLENBECK OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Oswego County Court (Armen J. Nazarian, J.), dated March 28, 2025. The order determined that defendant is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Entered: April 24, 2026

Ann Dillon Flynn