In re Christopher Scott F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Christopher Scott F.

264 A.D.2d 395, 693 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8499

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

DecidedAugust 2, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 264 A.D.2d 395 (In re Christopher Scott F.) 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 Christopher Scott F., 264 A.D.2d 395, 693 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8499 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.), entered June 29, 1998, which granted the motion of the juvenile to dismiss four petitions against him, with prejudice, for violations of the speedy trial provision of Family Court Act § 340.1.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the petitions are reinstated.

We agree with the contention of the Presentment Agency that the respondent’s right to a speedy trial (see, Family Ct Act § 340.1 [2]) was not violated. The respondent waived his right to challenge the adjournments of the fact-finding hearing past the 60-day period since he consented to the adjournments (see, Matter of Raymond B., 160 AD2d 936). He cannot now be heard to complain (see, Matter of Jermaine B., 249 AD2d 468; Matter of Diogenes V., 245 AD2d 42; Matter of Joseph CC., 234 AD2d 852, 853). Altman, J. P., Krausman, H. Miller and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.), entered June 29, 1998, which granted the motion of the juvenile to dismiss four petitions against him, with prejudice, for violations of the speedy trial provision of Family Court Act § 340.1.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the petitions are reinstated.

We agree with the contention of the Presentment Agency that the respondent’s right to a speedy trial (see, Family Ct Act § 340.1 [2]) was not violated. The respondent waived his right to challenge the adjournments of the fact-finding hearing past the 60-day period since he consented to the adjournments (see, Matter of Raymond B., 160 AD2d 936). He cannot now be heard to complain (see, Matter of Jermaine B., 249 AD2d 468; Matter of Diogenes V., 245 AD2d 42; Matter of Joseph CC., 234 AD2d 852, 853). Altman, J. P., Krausman, H. Miller and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 395, 693 N.Y.S.2d 227, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-christopher-scott-f-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack