In re James A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re James A.

198 A.D.2d 5, 604 N.Y.S.2d 724, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10244

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

DecidedNovember 4, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 198 A.D.2d 5 (In re James A.) 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 James A., 198 A.D.2d 5, 604 N.Y.S.2d 724, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10244 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (George L. Jurow, J.), entered April 22, 1993, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent following a fact-finding determination that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of a controlled [6]*6substance in the seventh degree, and placed him with the New York State Division for Youth for a period of 12 months, unanimously reversed on the law, without costs, and the petition dismissed.

As respondent presentment agency concedes, under Matter of Rodney J. (194 AD2d 342, lv granted 196 AD2d 686), the certification that the laboratory report annexed to the petition was a true copy of the original does not establish a non-hearsay prima facie case that the substance seized from appellant was cocaine, and, accordingly, the petition must be dismissed. In view of the foregoing, we do not address appellant’s other claims. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Kupferman, Asch and Kassal, 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 (George L. Jurow, J.), entered April 22, 1993, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent following a fact-finding determination that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of a controlled [6]*6substance in the seventh degree, and placed him with the New York State Division for Youth for a period of 12 months, unanimously reversed on the law, without costs, and the petition dismissed.

As respondent presentment agency concedes, under Matter of Rodney J. (194 AD2d 342, lv granted 196 AD2d 686), the certification that the laboratory report annexed to the petition was a true copy of the original does not establish a non-hearsay prima facie case that the substance seized from appellant was cocaine, and, accordingly, the petition must be dismissed. In view of the foregoing, we do not address appellant’s other claims. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Kupferman, Asch and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 5, 604 N.Y.S.2d 724, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-james-a-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack