In re Juan N.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Juan N.

276 A.D.2d 314, 714 N.Y.S.2d 211, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10532

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

DecidedOctober 12, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 276 A.D.2d 314 (In re Juan N.) 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 Juan N., 276 A.D.2d 314, 714 N.Y.S.2d 211, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10532 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (John Hunt, J.), entered on or about May 5, 1999, 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 robbery in the second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility were properly resolved by the trier of fact, which saw and heard the witnesses, and there is no basis upon which to disturb its determinations. Concur — Williams, J. P., Tom, Ellerin, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (John Hunt, J.), entered on or about May 5, 1999, 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 robbery in the second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility were properly resolved by the trier of fact, which saw and heard the witnesses, and there is no basis upon which to disturb its determinations. Concur — Williams, J. P., Tom, Ellerin, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

276 A.D.2d 314, 714 N.Y.S.2d 211, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-juan-n-nyappdiv-2000.