In re Justin R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Justin R.

300 A.D.2d 86, 751 N.Y.S.2d 465

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

DecidedDecember 12, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 300 A.D.2d 86 (In re Justin 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 Justin R., 300 A.D.2d 86, 751 N.Y.S.2d 465 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Harold Lynch, J.), entered on or about April 16, 2001, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of robbery in the second degree, and placed him with the Office of Children and Family Services in a limited secure facility for a period of up to 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 (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. The victim’s credible testimony clearly warranted the conclusion that appellant participated in the robbery by holding the victim from behind. Concur — Williams, P.J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Buckley and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Harold Lynch, J.), entered on or about April 16, 2001, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of robbery in the second degree, and placed him with the Office of Children and Family Services in a limited secure facility for a period of up to 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 (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. The victim’s credible testimony clearly warranted the conclusion that appellant participated in the robbery by holding the victim from behind. Concur — Williams, P.J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Buckley and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 86, 751 N.Y.S.2d 465, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-justin-r-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack