In re Dakim J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Dakim J.

90 A.D.3d 578, 934 N.Y.2d 806

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

DecidedDecember 27, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 90 A.D.3d 578 (In re Dakim J.) 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 Dakim J., 90 A.D.3d 578, 934 N.Y.2d 806 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

The court properly permitted the seven-year-old victim to give sworn testimony. The victim’s voir dire responses established that he sufficiently understood the difference between truth and falsity, the nature of a promise to tell the truth, and the wrongfulness and consequences of lying (see People v Nisoff, 36 NY2d 560, 565-566 [1975]; People v Cordero, 257 AD2d 372 [1999], lv denied 93 NY2d 968 [1999]).

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence [579]*579and 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 credibility determinations. The evidence established the elements of each offense, and we have considered and rejected appellant’s arguments to the contrary. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.

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

The court properly permitted the seven-year-old victim to give sworn testimony. The victim’s voir dire responses established that he sufficiently understood the difference between truth and falsity, the nature of a promise to tell the truth, and the wrongfulness and consequences of lying (see People v Nisoff, 36 NY2d 560, 565-566 [1975]; People v Cordero, 257 AD2d 372 [1999], lv denied 93 NY2d 968 [1999]).

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence [579]*579and 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 credibility determinations. The evidence established the elements of each offense, and we have considered and rejected appellant’s arguments to the contrary. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 A.D.3d 578, 934 N.Y.2d 806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-dakim-j-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack