In re Javier F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Javier F.

16 A.D.3d 290, 791 N.Y.S.2d 419, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3238

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

DecidedMarch 29, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 16 A.D.3d 290 (In re Javier F.) 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 Javier F., 16 A.D.3d 290, 791 N.Y.S.2d 419, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3238 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or [291]*291about November 17, 2003, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 24 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 Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The victim’s credible testimony disproved appellant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Saxe, Friedman and Sweeny, JJ.

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

— Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or [291]*291about November 17, 2003, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 24 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 Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The victim’s credible testimony disproved appellant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Saxe, Friedman and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.3d 290, 791 N.Y.S.2d 419, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-javier-f-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack