In re Alexander G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Alexander G.

265 A.D.2d 553, 696 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10757

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 25, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 265 A.D.2d 553 (In re Alexander G.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Alexander G., 265 A.D.2d 553, 696 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10757 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a juvenile [554]*554delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Fitzmaurice, J.), dated September 26, 1997, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated June 30, 1997, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of rape in the first degree, rape in the third degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, sexual abuse in the second degree, sexual abuse in the third degree, and sexual misconduct, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation for a period of two years. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated June 30, 1997.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (cf., People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish that the complainant was “physically helpless” within the meaning of Penal Law § 130.00 (7) (see, People v Ferrer, 250 AD2d 860; People v Yankowitz, 169 AD2d 748; People v Cirina, 143 AD2d 763; see also, People v Himmel, 252 AD2d 273).

The appellant’s remaining contentions do not require reversal. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Florio, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In a juvenile [554]*554delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Fitzmaurice, J.), dated September 26, 1997, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated June 30, 1997, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of rape in the first degree, rape in the third degree, sexual abuse in the first degree, sexual abuse in the second degree, sexual abuse in the third degree, and sexual misconduct, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation for a period of two years. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated June 30, 1997.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (cf., People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish that the complainant was “physically helpless” within the meaning of Penal Law § 130.00 (7) (see, People v Ferrer, 250 AD2d 860; People v Yankowitz, 169 AD2d 748; People v Cirina, 143 AD2d 763; see also, People v Himmel, 252 AD2d 273).

The appellant’s remaining contentions do not require reversal. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, Ritter and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 553, 696 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-alexander-g-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack