In re Anief G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Anief G.

39 A.D.3d 265, 833 N.Y.S.2d 457

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

DecidedApril 5, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 39 A.D.3d 265 (In re Anief 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 Anief G., 39 A.D.3d 265, 833 N.Y.S.2d 457 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about August 18, 2006, which, after a violation of probation hearing, revoked appellant’s probation and placed him in the custody of the Office of Children and Family Services for a period of up to 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly determined that the least restrictive alternative for appellant was placement (see Matter of Yohannes A., 243 AD2d 316 [1997]). This was appellant’s second violation of probation, and in each instance he had violated substantially all of the conditions of his probation, including his obligations to refrain from using drugs, to attend substance abuse counseling, and to perform community service. Appellant also had serious truancy problems. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Marlow, Sullivan, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about August 18, 2006, which, after a violation of probation hearing, revoked appellant’s probation and placed him in the custody of the Office of Children and Family Services for a period of up to 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly determined that the least restrictive alternative for appellant was placement (see Matter of Yohannes A., 243 AD2d 316 [1997]). This was appellant’s second violation of probation, and in each instance he had violated substantially all of the conditions of his probation, including his obligations to refrain from using drugs, to attend substance abuse counseling, and to perform community service. Appellant also had serious truancy problems. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Marlow, Sullivan, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 265, 833 N.Y.S.2d 457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-anief-g-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack