Truck Driver, Golden State Foods - Spring Valley NY
There are other people who go by the name Yoel Oberlander. The individual discussed on this page was born on August 29, 1980.
- Originally convicted of molesting an eleven-year-old girl (11/27/2002)
- People v. Yoel Oberlander - Despite 'Chemical Castration' Court Requires Defendant's Registration as Level 2 Sex Offender. (06/24/2003)
- Sex offender notification (04/21/2005)
- 2 Monsey sex offenders accused of violating new residence law (08/11/2007)
- Sex offender challenges constitutionality of Rockland residency law (10/28/2008)
- The People of The State of New York against Yoel Oberlander (01/2009)
- Two Monsey sex offenders live at new addresses (05/12/2011)
- Sex Offender Registration and Notification in the United States (07/01/2012)
- Registered sex offender sneaks into Catskills sleep-away camp 08/16/2012)
- Monsey sex offender Yoel Oberlander slips into boys' dorm, cops say (08/17/2012)
- Sex offender busted after sneaking in where orthodox Jewish kids were sleeping at camp (08/17/2012)
- New York State Sex Offender Registry (01/30/2014)
A SEX OFFENDER classification hearing was held for defendant, who had been sentenced to probation after conviction for second degree sexual abuse. He was a presumed Level 2 sex offender based on an 85 point score on a riskassessment instrument. Defendant, "chemically castrated" by medical treatments reducing his blood testosterone level, argued that the instrument was erroneous because he did not employ "forcible compulsion." The court, however, required defendant's registration as a Level 2 sex offender. It found insufficient evidence to conclude that an elevated testosterone level was the sole cause of defendant's actions and that defendant has a psychological abnormality that decreases his ability to control impulsive sexual behavior. The court determined that forcible compulsion may be found to result from an express or implied threat, which must be viewed in the context of a frightened 11 year old girl alone in an automobile with an adult who has placed his hand under her dress.
People v. Yoel Oberlander - The Court held a sex offender classification hearing pursuant to 168 of the Correction Law. The hearing was held to classify the above named defendant who had just been sentenced to six years probation following his conviction for Sexual Abuse in the Second Degree. The defendant was present and was represented by counsel.
In connection with the hearing, the Court reviewed the pre-sentence report with pre-sentence memoranda, as well as the risk assessment instrument prepared by the District Attorney's Office. The Court examined psychiatric and psychological reports from Dr. Thomas and Dr. Berlin respectively. Additionally, the Court heard testimony from Dr. Thomas concerning his clinical opinion regarding the defendant risk to re-offend and the defendant's course of treatment, including the inter-muscular anti-androgen therapy.
Dr. Thomas has indicated that he has undertaken the responsibility of continuing therapy with the defendant. As part of that continuing treatment, in conjunction with weekly psychotherapy, Dr. Thomas will continue with the monthly injections of Depo-Lupron and continue to monitor the levels of testosterone in the defendant's blood. Further, Dr. Thomas has assured the Court that he will report any problems to the defendant's probation officer.
As a result of the treatments so far, the testosterone level in the defendant's blood has been significantly lowered. According to Dr. Thomas, the defendant has been "chemically castrated" and thereby rendered virtually asexual.
The recommendation contained in the Risk Assessment Instrument is the presumptive risk level to be applied to an offender. In this case, the defendant received an aggregate score of 85 points when scored by the District Attorney, making him a presumptive level two.
The Court finds that consistent with the risk level instrument, the defendant should be classified as a "level 2" offender. The Court bases its determination on an evaluation of the criteria set forth in Correction Law 168-l(5) including, but not limited to, the defendant's history, the nature of the offense, the number of victims and vulnerability of the victims.
The defendant contends the Risk Assessment Instrument is erroneous in that he did not employ forcible compulsion (10 points) and that the evidence did not demonstrate three or more victims (30 points). In fact, in a prior incident, the defendant made admissions of exposing his penis to young girls on five occasions over the two week period prior to his arrest. Five victims signed depositions in reference to exposure incidents in which the defendant was identified. Forcible compulsion is not confined to physical force, but may be found to result from a threat, express or implied, which must be viewed in the context of a frightened eleven year old girl alone in an automobile with an adult who has placed his hand under her dress.
In any event, the factors listed in the statute are not exhaustive and special circumstances may warrant a departure from the presumptive risk level if aggravating factors are present. The Court finds that an override would be warranted in any event, since the defendant has a psychological abnormality that decreases his ability to control impulsive sexual behavior. Dr. Berlin's report demonstrates that the defendant has a sexual disorder that manifested itself in a pattern of genital exhibitionism that escalated in his fondling of a young girl.
The defendant's sexual fantasies and recurrent urges concerning sexual activities with young girls continued even after intervention. Thereafter, aggressive pharmocological treatment in the form of Depo-Luperon medication was recommended to suppress the production of testosterone, to increase the defendant's capacity for self-control and to prevent sexual criminality.
While the defendant's course of treatment will undoubtedly have the physical effect of lowering the defendant's testosterone, the Court has not been provided with sufficient evidence such that it can determine that the treatment will alleviate the risk of re-offense. While intuitively, the Court understands that an elevated testosterone level will increase sexual urges, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that an elevated testosterone level was the sole cause of the defendant's actions.
Additionally, Dr. Thomas' experience with the Depo-Luperon treatment is anecdotal, and his personal experience with long term treatment is non-existent. According to Dr. Thomas, he has treated a total of eight patients with this inter-muscular anti-androgen therapy. However, the longest he has treated any one of those patients was two and one half years. It is anticipated that the defendant's course of treatment will exceed two and one half years.
While Dr. Thomas was no doubt earnest in his belief that the defendant does not pose a risk to re-offend in the future, that position is not supported by any personal experience. Further, the Court has not received a report of any reliable study of the long term efficacy of this course of treatment.
Accordingly, the Court finds that the public would be best served if the defendant were required to register as a level two offender.
This Decision shall constitute the Order of the Court.
Name: Yoel Oberlander.
Address: 10952 ZIP code, Monsey.
Original jurisdiction: Spring Valley-Ramapo
Conviction: Nov. 27, 2002
Charge: second-degree sexual abuse.
Victim: 11-year-old girl.
Sentence: 6 years' probation.
Risk: moderate, Level 2.
Yoel Oberlander was classified by a court as a Level 2 offender, which is considered at moderate risk of becoming a repeat offender.
Oberlander pleaded guilty in 2002 to second-degree sexual abuse, second-degree unlawful imprisonment and endangering the welfare of a child, all misdemeanors. He admitted in County Court to having sexual contact with an 11-year-old girl. The sexual abuse took place in the Spring Valley and Ramapo area.
Both police departments investigated Oberlander, who was sentenced to six years' probation.
Spring Valley police notified the East Ramapo school district that Oberlander had registered his home address in Monsey. The Ramapo Police Department also was notified.
Earlier this month, East Ramapo officials sent about 8,000 letters containing Oberlander's photo, conviction and ZIP code home with students to give to their parents. The district also sent the information to private schools in Ramapo.
Under state law, police can tell school districts only the ZIP code for a Level 2 offender, not the full address. A full address is provided for those considered high risk, or Level 3. The low-risk category is Level 1.
Oberlander was among several sex offenders recently reported to East Ramapo school district residents. People have posted their photos in town, though in some places, residents said, Oberlander's photo was taken down.
The notifications are sent out after an offender gets a classification hearing in County Court. A judge decides if a person is Level 1, 2 or 3. Hearings are held for those convicted between 1996 and 2000, those moving in from another state and those recently convicted.
1. Does the ordinance conflict with state law, either because of conflicting policies or operational effect (that is, does the ordinance forbid what the Legislature has permitted or does the ordinance permit what the Legislature has forbidden)? 2. Was the state law intended, expressly or impliedly, to be exclusive in -- the field?
3. Does the subject matter reflect a need for uniformity?....
4. Is the state scheme so pervasive or comprehensive that it precludes coexistence of municipal regulation?
5. Does the ordinance stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of the Legislature?Id. See also N.Y.S. Club Assoc. v. City of N.Y., 69 N.Y.2d 211, 217 (1987); Albany Area Builder’s Assoc. v. Town of Guilderland, 74 N.Y.2d 372, 400 (1989).
By Jane Lerner
Journal News - May 12, 2011
• Level 3 is considered at high risk of repeating an offense. Police can provide schools and other establishments dealing with children or other vulnerable populations with an offender's photograph, address and background information. Level 3 offenders remain on the state registry for life.
• Level 2 offenders are considered at moderate risk of repeating an offense. Police can provide the same information they provide with Level 3 offenders. Level 2 offenders can petition to be taken off the registry after 30 years.
• Level 1 offenders are considered a low risk to repeat. Police can notify schools and other establishments of the offender's name and ZIP code.
- To learn whether a high-risk sex offender lives in your area, go to the state Division of Criminal Justice Services' Sex Offender Registry at www.criminaljustice.state.ny.us.
- The state Division of Criminal Justice Services maintains a Sex Offender Registry Information Line at 800-262-3257.
Registered sex offender sneaks into Catskills sleep-away camp
Man identified as Yoel Oberlander somehow got into kids' sleeping area
CBS News-New York - August 16, 2012
By Susan Edelman
New York Post - August 17, 2012
New York State Sex Offender Registry
January 30, 2014
FAIR USE NOTICE
"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." –– Margaret Mead