In re Joey R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Joey R.

254 A.D.2d 103, 678 N.Y.S.2d 624, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10665

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

DecidedOctober 13, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 254 A.D.2d 103 (In re Joey R.) 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 Joey R., 254 A.D.2d 103, 678 N.Y.S.2d 624, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10665 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered on or about August 23, 1996, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal facilitation in the fourth degree, and placed him on probation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[104]*104The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The totality of appellant’s actions along with the actions of the other participants provided ample evidence that appellant acted as both a “steerer” and a “lookout” by escorting the buyer of the cocaine to the seller and, during the transaction, repeatedly peering up and down the street. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Tom and Mazzarelli, 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 (Leah Marks, J.), entered on or about August 23, 1996, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal facilitation in the fourth degree, and placed him on probation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[104]*104The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The totality of appellant’s actions along with the actions of the other participants provided ample evidence that appellant acted as both a “steerer” and a “lookout” by escorting the buyer of the cocaine to the seller and, during the transaction, repeatedly peering up and down the street. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 103, 678 N.Y.S.2d 624, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-joey-r-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack