In re Joann M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Joann M.

36 A.D.2d 1018, 321 N.Y.S.2d 448, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4024

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

DecidedMay 20, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 36 A.D.2d 1018 (In re Joann M.) 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 Joann M., 36 A.D.2d 1018, 321 N.Y.S.2d 448, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4024 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: The order denying respondent a jury trial in this proceeding to adjudicate her a juvenile delinquent and the order refusing to declare subdivision (b) of section 744 of the Family Court Act unconstitutional as applied in this ease are affirmed under constraint of Matter of D. (Daniel) (27 N Y 2d 90) which held not only that a jury trial is not required in juvenile delinquency cases but that the rule in Matter of Winship (397 U. S. 358) that the proof must be beyond [1019]*1019a reasonable doubt, will not be retroactively applied. The preponderance of the evidence supports the findings and order adjudging respondent to be a juvenile delinquent. (Appeal from orders of Oneida County Family Court, adjudging respondent to be a juvenile delinquent.) Present — Del Vecchio, J. P., Witmer, Gabrielli, Moule and Henry, JJ.

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

Memorandum: The order denying respondent a jury trial in this proceeding to adjudicate her a juvenile delinquent and the order refusing to declare subdivision (b) of section 744 of the Family Court Act unconstitutional as applied in this ease are affirmed under constraint of Matter of D. (Daniel) (27 N Y 2d 90) which held not only that a jury trial is not required in juvenile delinquency cases but that the rule in Matter of Winship (397 U. S. 358) that the proof must be beyond [1019]*1019a reasonable doubt, will not be retroactively applied. The preponderance of the evidence supports the findings and order adjudging respondent to be a juvenile delinquent. (Appeal from orders of Oneida County Family Court, adjudging respondent to be a juvenile delinquent.) Present — Del Vecchio, J. P., Witmer, Gabrielli, Moule and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 A.D.2d 1018, 321 N.Y.S.2d 448, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4024, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-joann-m-nyappdiv-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack