In re Benjamin Q.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Benjamin Q.

56 A.D.2d 745, 392 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10990

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

DecidedMarch 3, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 56 A.D.2d 745 (In re Benjamin Q.) 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 Benjamin Q., 56 A.D.2d 745, 392 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10990 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Family Court, New York County, entered on

May 30, 1975, adjudicating appellant a juvenile delinquent and placing him on probation for a period of one year, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Appellant was found to be one of three youths who assaulted and took a radio from complainant. The same day complainant, in the presence of the police, identified appellant on the street and later again after appellant had been taken into custody. This could not be deemed impermissibly suggestive but, in any event, the facts indicate complainant had an independent source for his in-court identification. The court found that appellant was not the one who struck the complainant, but did find that he had participated in the robbery. The evidence sustains this finding in that appellant acted in the capacity of an accomplice inasmuch as he participated in forcing the complainant to turn over his radio. Concur— Kupferman, J. P., Murphy, Silverman, Markewich and Yesawich, JJ.

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

Family Court, New York County, entered on

May 30, 1975, adjudicating appellant a juvenile delinquent and placing him on probation for a period of one year, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Appellant was found to be one of three youths who assaulted and took a radio from complainant. The same day complainant, in the presence of the police, identified appellant on the street and later again after appellant had been taken into custody. This could not be deemed impermissibly suggestive but, in any event, the facts indicate complainant had an independent source for his in-court identification. The court found that appellant was not the one who struck the complainant, but did find that he had participated in the robbery. The evidence sustains this finding in that appellant acted in the capacity of an accomplice inasmuch as he participated in forcing the complainant to turn over his radio. Concur— Kupferman, J. P., Murphy, Silverman, Markewich and Yesawich, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 745, 392 N.Y.S.2d 32, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10990, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-benjamin-q-nyappdiv-1977.