In re Jose R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Jose R.

47 A.D.2d 925, 369 N.Y.S.2d 1000, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9371

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

DecidedApril 21, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.2d 925 (In re Jose 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 Jose R., 47 A.D.2d 925, 369 N.Y.S.2d 1000, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9371 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

In proceedings pursuant to article 7 of the Family Court Act, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 13, 1974, which, upon two determinations that appellant was a juvenile delinquent, placed him on probation. Appellant has brought up for review only one of said determinations, that under the petition in Docket No. D 2622/74. Order reversed, on the facts, said petition dismissed and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for the making of a new order of disposition with regard to the other determination, that under Docket No. 17206/73. The allegations of the petition under Docket No. D 2622/74 were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the evidence did not support a finding that, beyond a reasonable doubt, there had been an attempt at coercion. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Martuscello, Cohalan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

In proceedings pursuant to article 7 of the Family Court Act, the appeal is from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, dated March 13, 1974, which, upon two determinations that appellant was a juvenile delinquent, placed him on probation. Appellant has brought up for review only one of said determinations, that under the petition in Docket No. D 2622/74. Order reversed, on the facts, said petition dismissed and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for the making of a new order of disposition with regard to the other determination, that under Docket No. 17206/73. The allegations of the petition under Docket No. D 2622/74 were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the evidence did not support a finding that, beyond a reasonable doubt, there had been an attempt at coercion. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Martuscello, Cohalan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 925, 369 N.Y.S.2d 1000, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-jose-r-nyappdiv-1975.