In re Korie G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Korie G.

289 A.D.2d 1055, 735 N.Y.S.2d 847, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13189

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

DecidedDecember 21, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 289 A.D.2d 1055 (In re Korie G.) 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 Korie G., 289 A.D.2d 1055, 735 N.Y.S.2d 847, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13189 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The record supports Family Court’s finding that respondent committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal mischief in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 145.00 [1]). “The court, as the trier of fact, was entitled to resolve questions of credibility against respondent” (Matter of Edward V., 204 AD2d 1060) and to reject her testimony that she did not intend to damage her grandmother’s door. We reject respondent’s contention that the disposition was inappropriate. In view of respondent’s history of running away and the failure of less restrictive alternatives, the court did not abuse its discretion in placing respondent with the Office of Children and Family Services (see, Matter of Michael OO., 269 AD2d 633, 633-634). (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Rosa, J. — Juvenile Delinquency.) Present — Green, J. P., Kehoe, Burns, Gorski and Lawton, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The record supports Family Court’s finding that respondent committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal mischief in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 145.00 [1]). “The court, as the trier of fact, was entitled to resolve questions of credibility against respondent” (Matter of Edward V., 204 AD2d 1060) and to reject her testimony that she did not intend to damage her grandmother’s door. We reject respondent’s contention that the disposition was inappropriate. In view of respondent’s history of running away and the failure of less restrictive alternatives, the court did not abuse its discretion in placing respondent with the Office of Children and Family Services (see, Matter of Michael OO., 269 AD2d 633, 633-634). (Appeal from Order of Erie County Family Court, Rosa, J. — Juvenile Delinquency.) Present — Green, J. P., Kehoe, Burns, Gorski and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 A.D.2d 1055, 735 N.Y.S.2d 847, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-korie-g-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack