In re Kevin H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Kevin H.

43 A.D.2d 981, 352 N.Y.S.2d 664, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5630

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

DecidedFebruary 25, 1974

StatusPublished

This text of 43 A.D.2d 981 (In re Kevin H.) 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 Kevin H., 43 A.D.2d 981, 352 N.Y.S.2d 664, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5630 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, entered June 20, 1973, which, Upon an adjudication that appellant is a juvenile delinquent, ordered him placed in the State Training School for a period of not more than 18 months. Order reversed, on the law and in the interests of justice, without costs, and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein set forth. Since the probation officer told the Family Court that his investigation report had been completed but was untyped, and orally reported to the court that appellant should be seen for a full psychiatric study to determine the most appropriate placement for him, the court should not have summarily committed appellant to the Warwick Training School. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Kings County, entered June 20, 1973, which, Upon an adjudication that appellant is a juvenile delinquent, ordered him placed in the State Training School for a period of not more than 18 months. Order reversed, on the law and in the interests of justice, without costs, and proceeding remanded to the Family Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein set forth. Since the probation officer told the Family Court that his investigation report had been completed but was untyped, and orally reported to the court that appellant should be seen for a full psychiatric study to determine the most appropriate placement for him, the court should not have summarily committed appellant to the Warwick Training School. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Christ, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.2d 981, 352 N.Y.S.2d 664, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5630, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kevin-h-nyappdiv-1974.