In re Khalif F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Khalif F.

256 A.D.2d 9, 680 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12801

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

DecidedDecember 1, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D.2d 9 (In re Khalif F.) 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 Khalif F., 256 A.D.2d 9, 680 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12801 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposi[10]*10tion, Family Court, New York County (Mary Bednar, J.), entered on or about April 29, 1997, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of assault in the third degree, and placed him on probation for 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s fact-finding determination that the victim suffered “physical injury” (Penal Law § 10.00 [9]) and that such injury was intended by appellant was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). Inconsistencies in testimony and other matters relating to credibility were properly presented to the trier of facts and we see no reason to disturb its findings. Given these credibility determinations, there was ample evidence supporting the elements of assault in the third degree. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Order of disposi[10]*10tion, Family Court, New York County (Mary Bednar, J.), entered on or about April 29, 1997, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of assault in the third degree, and placed him on probation for 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s fact-finding determination that the victim suffered “physical injury” (Penal Law § 10.00 [9]) and that such injury was intended by appellant was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). Inconsistencies in testimony and other matters relating to credibility were properly presented to the trier of facts and we see no reason to disturb its findings. Given these credibility determinations, there was ample evidence supporting the elements of assault in the third degree. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D.2d 9, 680 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-khalif-f-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack