In re Clifford A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Clifford A.

261 A.D.2d 340, 690 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5788

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

DecidedMay 27, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D.2d 340 (In re Clifford A.) 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 Clifford A., 261 A.D.2d 340, 690 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sara Schechter, J.), entered on or about December 3, 1997, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of petit larceny, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree and criminal possession of an anti-security item, and placing appellant under the supervision of the Department of Probation for a period of 1 year, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s findings were based on legally sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence of appellant’s guilt of each of the charges, including his explicit admission that he was shoplifting. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Mazzarelli, Rubin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sara Schechter, J.), entered on or about December 3, 1997, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of petit larceny, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree and criminal possession of an anti-security item, and placing appellant under the supervision of the Department of Probation for a period of 1 year, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s findings were based on legally sufficient evidence and were not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence of appellant’s guilt of each of the charges, including his explicit admission that he was shoplifting. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Mazzarelli, Rubin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 340, 690 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-clifford-a-nyappdiv-1999.