In re Emmanuel F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Emmanuel F.

11 A.D.3d 383, 783 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12466

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

DecidedOctober 26, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 11 A.D.3d 383 (In re Emmanuel F.) 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 Emmanuel F., 11 A.D.3d 383, 783 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12466 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sheldon M. Rand, J.), entered on or about April 14, 2003, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of robbery in the second degree, and placed him with the Office of Children and Family Services 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. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. Contrary to appellant’s contention that he was merely present at the scene when his companions robbed the victims, there was ample evidence warranting the inference of accessorial liability, including evidence that appellant encouraged his companions to hit the victims, and that he returned to the scene with his companions shortly after the first incident and continued to harass and rob the victims (see Matter of Juan J., 81 NY2d 739 [1992]; People v Allah, 71 NY2d 830 [1988]). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Ellerin and Marlow, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sheldon M. Rand, J.), entered on or about April 14, 2003, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of robbery in the second degree, and placed him with the Office of Children and Family Services 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. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. Contrary to appellant’s contention that he was merely present at the scene when his companions robbed the victims, there was ample evidence warranting the inference of accessorial liability, including evidence that appellant encouraged his companions to hit the victims, and that he returned to the scene with his companions shortly after the first incident and continued to harass and rob the victims (see Matter of Juan J., 81 NY2d 739 [1992]; People v Allah, 71 NY2d 830 [1988]). Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Ellerin and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.3d 383, 783 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-emmanuel-f-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack