In re Jamal H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Jamal H.

235 A.D.2d 270, 652 N.Y.S.2d 36, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 272

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

DecidedJanuary 16, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 235 A.D.2d 270 (In re Jamal H.) 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 Jamal H., 235 A.D.2d 270, 652 N.Y.S.2d 36, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 272 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Bruce Kaplan, J.), entered on about [271]*271December 20, 1995, adjudicating respondent a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted robbery in the third degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and placing him with the Division for Youth for a period of up to 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Under the facts of this case, the speedy trial provisions of Family Court Act § 340.1 were observed (see, Matter of Garrett T., 224 AD2d 308). Since respondent was released on August 21, 1995 after his initial appearance on August 15, 1995 and after a subsequent adjournment for good cause on August 18, 1995, the 60-day period for the commencement of the fact-finding hearing under Family Court Act § 340.1 (2) was applicable to this case, and not the 3-day period under section 340.1 (1).

We have considered respondent’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Bruce Kaplan, J.), entered on about [271]*271December 20, 1995, adjudicating respondent a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted robbery in the third degree and attempted assault in the third degree, and placing him with the Division for Youth for a period of up to 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Under the facts of this case, the speedy trial provisions of Family Court Act § 340.1 were observed (see, Matter of Garrett T., 224 AD2d 308). Since respondent was released on August 21, 1995 after his initial appearance on August 15, 1995 and after a subsequent adjournment for good cause on August 18, 1995, the 60-day period for the commencement of the fact-finding hearing under Family Court Act § 340.1 (2) was applicable to this case, and not the 3-day period under section 340.1 (1).

We have considered respondent’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D.2d 270, 652 N.Y.S.2d 36, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jamal-h-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack