In re Estelis C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Estelis C.

18 A.D.3d 321, 795 N.Y.S.2d 41, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5249

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

DecidedMay 17, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.3d 321 (In re Estelis 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 Estelis C., 18 A.D.3d 321, 795 N.Y.S.2d 41, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5249 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sheldon M. Rand, J.), [322]*322entered on or about February 27, 2004, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination (Mary Bednar, J.) that she committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of assault in the third degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 12 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 (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The credible evidence disproved appellant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Williams and Catterson, JJ.

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

— Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sheldon M. Rand, J.), [322]*322entered on or about February 27, 2004, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination (Mary Bednar, J.) that she committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of assault in the third degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 12 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 (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The credible evidence disproved appellant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Williams and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.3d 321, 795 N.Y.S.2d 41, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estelis-c-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack