In re Dowayne H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Dowayne H.

281 A.D.2d 865, 722 N.Y.S.2d 189, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3224

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

DecidedMarch 29, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D.2d 865 (In re Dowayne H.) 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 Dowayne H., 281 A.D.2d 865, 722 N.Y.S.2d 189, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3224 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Rose, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Albany County (Tobin, J.), entered February 22, 2000, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, to adjudicate respondent a juvenile delinquent.

In our prior decision (278 AD2d 706), we remitted this matter to Family Court for the purpose of specifying the type of facility in which the Office of Children and Family Services is authorized to place respondent as required by Family Court Act § 353.3 (3). In an amended order of disposition dated December 22, 2000, Family Court has now specified a limited secure facility for such placement. There being no further submissions by the parties in this matter, we affirm on the grounds stated in our prior decision.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Peters and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order, as amended, is affirmed, without costs.

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

Rose, J.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Albany County (Tobin, J.), entered February 22, 2000, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, to adjudicate respondent a juvenile delinquent.

In our prior decision (278 AD2d 706), we remitted this matter to Family Court for the purpose of specifying the type of facility in which the Office of Children and Family Services is authorized to place respondent as required by Family Court Act § 353.3 (3). In an amended order of disposition dated December 22, 2000, Family Court has now specified a limited secure facility for such placement. There being no further submissions by the parties in this matter, we affirm on the grounds stated in our prior decision.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Peters and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order, as amended, is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D.2d 865, 722 N.Y.S.2d 189, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-dowayne-h-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack