In re Heather G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Heather G.

55 A.D.3d 403, 864 N.Y.S.2d 914, 56 A.D.2d 326, 871 N.Y.S.2d 1

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

DecidedOctober 21, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 55 A.D.3d 403 (In re Heather G.) 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 Heather G., 55 A.D.3d 403, 864 N.Y.S.2d 914, 56 A.D.2d 326, 871 N.Y.S.2d 1 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.), entered or about December 20, 2006, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that she committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted assault in the third degree, and imposed a conditional discharge 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 (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. The testimony of the victim and her mother established that appellant attacked the victim with intent to cause injury and without justification. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P, Catterson, McGuire, Acosta and Renwick, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.), entered or about December 20, 2006, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that she committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted assault in the third degree, and imposed a conditional discharge 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 (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. The testimony of the victim and her mother established that appellant attacked the victim with intent to cause injury and without justification. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P, Catterson, McGuire, Acosta and Renwick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 A.D.3d 403, 864 N.Y.S.2d 914, 56 A.D.2d 326, 871 N.Y.S.2d 1, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-heather-g-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack