In re Karen M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Karen M.

58 A.D.3d 734, 872 N.Y.S.2d 472

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

DecidedJanuary 20, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 58 A.D.3d 734 (In re Karen M.) 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 Karen M., 58 A.D.3d 734, 872 N.Y.S.2d 472 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Hunt, J.), dated June 6, 2008, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated May 6, 2008, made upon the appellant’s admission, finding that the appellant committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of menacing in the third degree, adjudged her to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed her on probation for a period of 15 months.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

[735]*735The Family Court has broad discretion as to the dispositional orders it enters (see Matter of Ashley D., 55 AD3d 605 [2008]; Matter of Ashley H., 53 AD3d 578 [2008]; Matter of Melissa B., 49 AD3d 536 [2008]). Here, contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in adjudicating her a juvenile delinquent and placing her on probation for a period of 15 months instead of granting an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal. This disposition was appropriate in light of, inter alia, the nature of the incident, as well as the appellant’s deficient academic performance and her poor record of attendance in school (see Matter of Erika R., 55 AD3d 740 [2008]; Matter of Tyrell D., 24 AD3d 440, 441 [2005]). Rivera, J.R, Santucci, Garni and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Hunt, J.), dated June 6, 2008, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated May 6, 2008, made upon the appellant’s admission, finding that the appellant committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of menacing in the third degree, adjudged her to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed her on probation for a period of 15 months.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

[735]*735The Family Court has broad discretion as to the dispositional orders it enters (see Matter of Ashley D., 55 AD3d 605 [2008]; Matter of Ashley H., 53 AD3d 578 [2008]; Matter of Melissa B., 49 AD3d 536 [2008]). Here, contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in adjudicating her a juvenile delinquent and placing her on probation for a period of 15 months instead of granting an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal. This disposition was appropriate in light of, inter alia, the nature of the incident, as well as the appellant’s deficient academic performance and her poor record of attendance in school (see Matter of Erika R., 55 AD3d 740 [2008]; Matter of Tyrell D., 24 AD3d 440, 441 [2005]). Rivera, J.R, Santucci, Garni and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A.D.3d 734, 872 N.Y.S.2d 472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-karen-m-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack