In re David T.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re David T.

45 A.D.2d 690, 357 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4693

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

DecidedJune 18, 1974

StatusPublished

This text of 45 A.D.2d 690 (In re David T.) 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 T., 45 A.D.2d 690, 357 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4693 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court of the State of New York, Bronx County, .entered on March 1, 1974, adjudicating appellant a juvenile delinquent and placing him at the Elmira Reception Center, following a determination after a fact-finding hearing on November 21, 1973, that the appellant had committed acts which if done by an adult would constitute felonies, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the matter is remanded for a new fact-finding hearing to be held before a different Judge, without costs and without disbursements. The evidence at the fact-finding hearing consisted primarily of the testimony of the two victims of the alleged crimes and accordingly, it was reversible error to deny the law guardian’s timely request to inspect the minutes of their Grand Jury testimony (People v. Rosario, 9 N Y 2d 286, cert. den. 368 U. S. 866; Matter of Gold v. Quinones, 37 A D 2d 618). Additionally, in the interest of justice, the new fact-finding hearing should be held before a different Judge (cf. People v. Corelli, 41 A D 2d 939). Concur — Markewich, J. P., Nunez, Kupferman, Tilzer and Lane, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court of the State of New York, Bronx County, .entered on March 1, 1974, adjudicating appellant a juvenile delinquent and placing him at the Elmira Reception Center, following a determination after a fact-finding hearing on November 21, 1973, that the appellant had committed acts which if done by an adult would constitute felonies, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the matter is remanded for a new fact-finding hearing to be held before a different Judge, without costs and without disbursements. The evidence at the fact-finding hearing consisted primarily of the testimony of the two victims of the alleged crimes and accordingly, it was reversible error to deny the law guardian’s timely request to inspect the minutes of their Grand Jury testimony (People v. Rosario, 9 N Y 2d 286, cert. den. 368 U. S. 866; Matter of Gold v. Quinones, 37 A D 2d 618). Additionally, in the interest of justice, the new fact-finding hearing should be held before a different Judge (cf. People v. Corelli, 41 A D 2d 939). Concur — Markewich, J. P., Nunez, Kupferman, Tilzer and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 A.D.2d 690, 357 N.Y.S.2d 66, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-david-t-nyappdiv-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack