In re Isaac M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Isaac M.

219 A.D.2d 805, 632 N.Y.S.2d 49, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10814

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 219 A.D.2d 805 (In re Isaac M.) 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 Isaac M., 219 A.D.2d 805, 632 N.Y.S.2d 49, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10814 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The record supports Family Court’s finding that respondent committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.00 [1]). Evidence that the victim experienced "a lot” of pain after respondent struck him with a skateboard and that stitches were required to close the cut beside the victim’s eye is sufficient to establish physical injury (see, People v Fallen, 194 AD2d 928, lv denied 82 NY2d 753; People v [806]*806Beaton, 152 AD2d 992, lv denied 74 NY2d 845; People v Ruttenbur, 112 AD2d 13).

We have examined respondent’s remaining contentions and conclude that they lack merit. (Appeal from Order of Niagara County Family Court, Crapsi, J. — Juvenile Delinquency.) Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The record supports Family Court’s finding that respondent committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.00 [1]). Evidence that the victim experienced "a lot” of pain after respondent struck him with a skateboard and that stitches were required to close the cut beside the victim’s eye is sufficient to establish physical injury (see, People v Fallen, 194 AD2d 928, lv denied 82 NY2d 753; People v [806]*806Beaton, 152 AD2d 992, lv denied 74 NY2d 845; People v Ruttenbur, 112 AD2d 13).

We have examined respondent’s remaining contentions and conclude that they lack merit. (Appeal from Order of Niagara County Family Court, Crapsi, J. — Juvenile Delinquency.) Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

219 A.D.2d 805, 632 N.Y.S.2d 49, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10814, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-isaac-m-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack