In re David B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re David B.

45 A.D.3d 396, 845 N.Y.S.2d 309

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

DecidedNovember 15, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 45 A.D.3d 396 (In re David B.) 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 David B., 45 A.D.3d 396, 845 N.Y.S.2d 309 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Susan R. Larabee, J.), entered on or about August 29, 2006, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he [397]*397committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted assault in the second degree, menacing in the third degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth 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. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The evidence credited by the court established each of the charges, and disproved appellant’s justification defense, beyond a reasonable doubt. The record does not support appellant’s assertion that the court misunderstood or misapplied the proper standard of proof regarding the defense of justification. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Buckley and Malone, 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 (Susan R. Larabee, J.), entered on or about August 29, 2006, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he [397]*397committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted assault in the second degree, menacing in the third degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth 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. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The evidence credited by the court established each of the charges, and disproved appellant’s justification defense, beyond a reasonable doubt. The record does not support appellant’s assertion that the court misunderstood or misapplied the proper standard of proof regarding the defense of justification. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Buckley and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 A.D.3d 396, 845 N.Y.S.2d 309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-david-b-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack