In re Joseph B.

49 A.D.3d 1309, 852 N.Y.2d 871
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 14, 2008·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Memorandum: Family Court did not abuse its broad discretion in this juvenile delinquency proceeding by placing respondent in a limited secure facility, “the least restrictive available alternative . . . which is consistent with the needs and best interests of the respondent and the need for protection of the community” (Family Ct Act § 352.2 [2] [a]; see Matter of Brendon H., 43 AD3d 1283 [2007]). The record of the dispositional hearing establishes that respondent is in need of drug treatment, psychological counseling, special educational services and a structured environment, and the court properly determined that those needs can be addressed most effectively in a limited secure facility (see Matter of Vidal W., 267 AD2d 1104 [1999]; Matter of Willie J.H., 258 AD2d 938 [1999]). Present— Hurlbutt, J.P., Martoche, Lunn, Green and Gorski, JJ.

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

In re Joseph B., 49 A.D.3d 1309, 852 N.Y.2d 871 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

49 A.D.3d 1309 (In re Joseph B.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Ryan G.
112 A.D.3d 712 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)