In re Angel G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Angel G.

4 A.D.2d 118, 770 N.Y.S.2d 863, 4 A.D.3d 118, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 965

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 4 A.D.2d 118 (In re Angel 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 Angel G., 4 A.D.2d 118, 770 N.Y.S.2d 863, 4 A.D.3d 118, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 965 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sheldon Rand, J.), entered on or about December 18, 2002, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and placed him on probation with the Juvenile Intensive Supervision Program for a period of two years, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). Issues of credibility and identification were properly considered by the court and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe and Marlow, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sheldon Rand, J.), entered on or about December 18, 2002, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and placed him on probation with the Juvenile Intensive Supervision Program for a period of two years, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). Issues of credibility and identification were properly considered by the court and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.2d 118, 770 N.Y.S.2d 863, 4 A.D.3d 118, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 965, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-angel-g-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack