In re Brandon C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Brandon C.

61 A.D.3d 581, 876 N.Y.S.2d 867

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

DecidedApril 28, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 61 A.D.3d 581 (In re Brandon C.) 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 Brandon C., 61 A.D.3d 581, 876 N.Y.S.2d 867 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J), entered on or about May 28, 2008, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of robbery in the third degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 15 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning identification and credibility. The victim had a sufficient opportunity to view her assailant, and she spontaneously recognized appellant minutes after the robbery. Concur—Saxe, J.E, Friedman, Moskowitz, Freedman and Richter, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J), entered on or about May 28, 2008, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of robbery in the third degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 15 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning identification and credibility. The victim had a sufficient opportunity to view her assailant, and she spontaneously recognized appellant minutes after the robbery. Concur—Saxe, J.E, Friedman, Moskowitz, Freedman and Richter, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 A.D.3d 581, 876 N.Y.S.2d 867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-brandon-c-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack