In re Francisco S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Francisco S.

207 A.D.2d 716, 616 N.Y.S.2d 950, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8941

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 207 A.D.2d 716 (In re Francisco S.) 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 Francisco S., 207 A.D.2d 716, 616 N.Y.S.2d 950, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8941 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Richard Ross, J.), entered July 13, 1993, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent following a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and placed him with the New York State Division for Youth for a period of 18 months, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the petition dismissed, without costs.

As the presentment agency concedes on constraint of Matter of Rodney J. (83 NY2d 503) and Matter of Wesley M. (83 NY2d 898), because the laboratory reports annexed to the petition do not state that they were signed by the person who analyzed the substance seized from appellant, the petition lacks non-hearsay allegations establishing the identity of such substance, and must therefore be dismissed as insufficient on its face (see also, Matter of Manuel F., 206 AD2d 337). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Richard Ross, J.), entered July 13, 1993, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent following a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and placed him with the New York State Division for Youth for a period of 18 months, unanimously reversed, on the law, and the petition dismissed, without costs.

As the presentment agency concedes on constraint of Matter of Rodney J. (83 NY2d 503) and Matter of Wesley M. (83 NY2d 898), because the laboratory reports annexed to the petition do not state that they were signed by the person who analyzed the substance seized from appellant, the petition lacks non-hearsay allegations establishing the identity of such substance, and must therefore be dismissed as insufficient on its face (see also, Matter of Manuel F., 206 AD2d 337). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 716, 616 N.Y.S.2d 950, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8941, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-francisco-s-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack