In re Beniquwa D.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Beniquwa D.

33 A.D.3d 420, 821 N.Y.S.2d 762

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

DecidedOctober 12, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 33 A.D.3d 420 (In re Beniquwa D.) 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 Beniquwa D., 33 A.D.3d 420, 821 N.Y.S.2d 762 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered May 23, 2005, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon her admission that she committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted assault in the third degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion in adjudicating appellant a juvenile delinquent and imposing a term of probation (see e.g. Matter of Jonaivy Q., 286 AD2d 645 [2001]). In light of the seriousness of the underlying incident, which resulted in injuries to the victim, as well as appellant’s history of school [421]*421disciplinary and truancy problems, the court adopted the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant’s needs (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947, 948 [1984]). Concur—Tom, J.R, Marlow, Sullivan, McGuire and Malone, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered May 23, 2005, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon her admission that she committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted assault in the third degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion in adjudicating appellant a juvenile delinquent and imposing a term of probation (see e.g. Matter of Jonaivy Q., 286 AD2d 645 [2001]). In light of the seriousness of the underlying incident, which resulted in injuries to the victim, as well as appellant’s history of school [421]*421disciplinary and truancy problems, the court adopted the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant’s needs (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947, 948 [1984]). Concur—Tom, J.R, Marlow, Sullivan, McGuire and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.3d 420, 821 N.Y.S.2d 762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-beniquwa-d-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack