In re Deshon A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Deshon A.

39 A.D.3d 338, 832 N.Y.S.2d 432

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

DecidedApril 17, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 39 A.D.3d 338 (In re Deshon A.) 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 Deshon A., 39 A.D.3d 338, 832 N.Y.S.2d 432 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.), entered on or about April 25, 2006, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed acts, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted sexual abuse in the first and second degrees and sexual abuse in the second and third degrees, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The sexual gratification element (see Penal Law § 130.00 [3]) could be readily inferred from appellant’s conduct itself, for which there was no innocent explanation (see e.g. Matter of Najee A., 26 AD3d 258 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 703 [2006]; Matter of Kenny O., 276 AD2d 271 [2000], lv denied 96.NY2d 701 [2001]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Friedman, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.), entered on or about April 25, 2006, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed acts, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted sexual abuse in the first and second degrees and sexual abuse in the second and third degrees, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The sexual gratification element (see Penal Law § 130.00 [3]) could be readily inferred from appellant’s conduct itself, for which there was no innocent explanation (see e.g. Matter of Najee A., 26 AD3d 258 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 703 [2006]; Matter of Kenny O., 276 AD2d 271 [2000], lv denied 96.NY2d 701 [2001]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Friedman, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 338, 832 N.Y.S.2d 432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-deshon-a-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack