In re Derrick C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Derrick C.

52 A.D.2d 522, 381 N.Y.S.2d 873, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12049

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

DecidedApril 1, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 52 A.D.2d 522 (In re Derrick C.) 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 Derrick C., 52 A.D.2d 522, 381 N.Y.S.2d 873, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12049 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County, entered January 24, 1974, which discharged the petition to another petition in which appellant was placed on probation following a determination made on June 12, 1973 finding, after a hearing, that appellant had committed acts, which, if done by an adult, would constitute reckless endangerment and possession of a dangerous weapon, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. While it would have been preferable to permit the introduction of the testimony of the teachers at the Reading Institute regarding appellant’s reputation (People v Colantone, 243 NY 134), the failure to do so was harmless error. "Character evidence does not exist in a vacuum, and its value, influence or the weight to be accorded it depends in great part upon the other evidence in the case.” (See People v Miller, 35 NY2d 65, 69.) There is no reason for this court to disturb the findings of the [523]*523trier of the facts, since only he had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses and assess their credibility. (People v Regina, 19 NY2d 65.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Murphy, Silverman, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County, entered January 24, 1974, which discharged the petition to another petition in which appellant was placed on probation following a determination made on June 12, 1973 finding, after a hearing, that appellant had committed acts, which, if done by an adult, would constitute reckless endangerment and possession of a dangerous weapon, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. While it would have been preferable to permit the introduction of the testimony of the teachers at the Reading Institute regarding appellant’s reputation (People v Colantone, 243 NY 134), the failure to do so was harmless error. "Character evidence does not exist in a vacuum, and its value, influence or the weight to be accorded it depends in great part upon the other evidence in the case.” (See People v Miller, 35 NY2d 65, 69.) There is no reason for this court to disturb the findings of the [523]*523trier of the facts, since only he had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses and assess their credibility. (People v Regina, 19 NY2d 65.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Murphy, Silverman, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 522, 381 N.Y.S.2d 873, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12049, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-derrick-c-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack