In re Jacqueline C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Jacqueline C.

273 A.D.2d 128, 710 N.Y.S.2d 889, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7175

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

DecidedJune 20, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 273 A.D.2d 128 (In re Jacqueline 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 Jacqueline C., 273 A.D.2d 128, 710 N.Y.S.2d 889, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7175 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (John Hunt, J.), entered on or about April 13, 1999, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 2 years, 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 [129]*129basis upon which to disturb the court’s determinations concerning identification and credibility. Concur — Williams, J. P., Tom, Rubin and Andrias, 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 (John Hunt, J.), entered on or about April 13, 1999, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute robbery in the second degree, grand larceny in the fourth degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 2 years, 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 [129]*129basis upon which to disturb the court’s determinations concerning identification and credibility. Concur — Williams, J. P., Tom, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D.2d 128, 710 N.Y.S.2d 889, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jacqueline-c-nyappdiv-2000.