In re Javone C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Javone C.

60 A.D.3d 494, 875 N.Y.S.2d 63

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

DecidedMarch 17, 2009

StatusPublished

This text of 60 A.D.3d 494 (In re Javone 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 Javone C., 60 A.D.3d 494, 875 N.Y.S.2d 63 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Robert R. Reed, J.), entered on or about June 19, 2008, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon his admission that he committed an act, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of reckless endangerment in the second degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion when it denied appellant’s request for a dismissal of the petition or an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]). The court properly determined that appellant required supervision (see Family Ct Act § 352.1 [1]) and that probation was the least restrictive available alternative (see Family Ct Act § 352.2 [2]). Given the gravity of appellant’s acts and his need for psychiatric treatment, the 12-month period of probation supervision is appropriate. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez, Moskowitz and Renwick, JJ.

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

— Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Robert R. Reed, J.), entered on or about June 19, 2008, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon his admission that he committed an act, which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of reckless endangerment in the second degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion when it denied appellant’s request for a dismissal of the petition or an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]). The court properly determined that appellant required supervision (see Family Ct Act § 352.1 [1]) and that probation was the least restrictive available alternative (see Family Ct Act § 352.2 [2]). Given the gravity of appellant’s acts and his need for psychiatric treatment, the 12-month period of probation supervision is appropriate. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez, Moskowitz and Renwick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.3d 494, 875 N.Y.S.2d 63, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-javone-c-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack