In re Darryl W.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Darryl W.

24 A.D.3d 134, 808 N.Y.S.2d 158

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

DecidedDecember 6, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 24 A.D.3d 134 (In re Darryl W.) 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 Darryl W., 24 A.D.3d 134, 808 N.Y.S.2d 158 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Harold J. [135]*135Lynch, J.), entered on or about June 30, 2004, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed an act, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 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 Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). Appellant’s verbal and physical conduct prevented his teacher from leaving the classroom, and constituted restraint under Penal Law § 135.00 (1). Concur— Buckley, P.J., Andrias, Saxe, Nardelli and Malone, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Harold J. [135]*135Lynch, J.), entered on or about June 30, 2004, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed an act, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of unlawful imprisonment in the second degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 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 Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). Appellant’s verbal and physical conduct prevented his teacher from leaving the classroom, and constituted restraint under Penal Law § 135.00 (1). Concur— Buckley, P.J., Andrias, Saxe, Nardelli and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.3d 134, 808 N.Y.S.2d 158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-darryl-w-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack