In re Anthony U.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Anthony U.

39 A.D.3d 424, 832 N.Y.S.2d 806

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

DecidedApril 26, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 A.D.3d 424 (In re Anthony U.) 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 Anthony U., 39 A.D.3d 424, 832 N.Y.S.2d 806 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of dispo[425]*425sition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about January 11, 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 up to 12 months with authorization for detention in a limited secure facility, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s determination that appellant violated the conditions of his probation to an extent warranting revocation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Alpheaus M., 168 AD2d 208 [1990]). Appellant, who had already violated his probation and received a second chance, failed to comply with his probation conditions, which included reporting to his probation officer, attending school, and cooperating with a rehabilitation program. The record supports the court’s rejection of appellant’s various excuses.

The court’s placement of appellant was a proper exercise of discretion that constituted the least restrictive alternative consistent with the needs of appellant and the community (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Buckley, Gonzalez and Malone, JJ.

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

Order of dispo[425]*425sition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about January 11, 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 up to 12 months with authorization for detention in a limited secure facility, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s determination that appellant violated the conditions of his probation to an extent warranting revocation is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Matter of Alpheaus M., 168 AD2d 208 [1990]). Appellant, who had already violated his probation and received a second chance, failed to comply with his probation conditions, which included reporting to his probation officer, attending school, and cooperating with a rehabilitation program. The record supports the court’s rejection of appellant’s various excuses.

The court’s placement of appellant was a proper exercise of discretion that constituted the least restrictive alternative consistent with the needs of appellant and the community (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Buckley, Gonzalez and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 424, 832 N.Y.S.2d 806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-anthony-u-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack