In re Carlos G.

215 A.D.2d 165, 626 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4931
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 9, 1995
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 215 A.D.2d 165 (In re Carlos 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 Carlos G., 215 A.D.2d 165, 626 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4931 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Edward M. Kaufmann, J.), entered April 21, 1994, which adjudicated respondent a juvenile delinquent upon a finding that he committed acts, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and ordered his conditional discharge for a period of 12 months, conditioning said discharge on his cooperation with the conditions of placement imposed on a separate juvenile delinquency matter, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Contrary to respondent’s contention, the petition, together with the supporting deposition of Officer Maldonado-Cruz, contained sufficient nonhearsay allegations to support the charge of obstruction of governmental administration in the second degree. The allegations that respondent punched an officer and yelled obscenities while other officers were attempting to arrest his mother sufficiently demonstrated that he specifically intended to interfere with the officer’s function of maintaining order (see, Family Ct Act § 311.2; People v Tarver, 188 AD2d 938, Iv denied 81 NY2d 893). Moreover, this finding, [166]*166as well as the finding that respondent committed an act, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted assault in the third degree, was supported by the legally sufficient evidence adduced at the fact-finding hearing and was not against the weight of the evidence presented. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Ellerin, Rubin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Sumter
2017 NY Slip Op 4897 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
People v. Nunez
36 Misc. 3d 172 (Criminal Court of the City of New York, 2012)
D.A.D.O. v. State
57 So. 3d 798 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 2009)
People v. Beam
22 Misc. 3d 306 (Criminal Court of the City of New York, 2008)
People v. Cacsere
185 Misc. 2d 92 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
People v. Tillman
184 Misc. 2d 20 (Auburn City Court, 2000)
People v. Garnett
235 A.D.2d 492 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
In re Davan L.
233 A.D.2d 510 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
215 A.D.2d 165, 626 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4931, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-carlos-g-nyappdiv-1995.