In re Lizzette F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Lizzette F.

81 A.D.3d 429, 916 N.Y.S.2d 773

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 81 A.D.3d 429 (In re Lizzette 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 Lizzette F., 81 A.D.3d 429, 916 N.Y.S.2d 773 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), entered on or about April 6, 2010, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that she committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and placed her on enhanced supervised probation for 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of appellant’s history of running away and drug use, and her troubled relationship with her mother, the court properly exercised its discretion in placing appellant on probation under the enhanced supervision program. This was the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant’s needs and the need for protection of the community (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]). Concur—Saxe, J.E, Friedman, Catterson, Acosta and Richter, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), entered on or about April 6, 2010, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that she committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and placed her on enhanced supervised probation for 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of appellant’s history of running away and drug use, and her troubled relationship with her mother, the court properly exercised its discretion in placing appellant on probation under the enhanced supervision program. This was the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant’s needs and the need for protection of the community (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]). Concur—Saxe, J.E, Friedman, Catterson, Acosta and Richter, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 A.D.3d 429, 916 N.Y.S.2d 773, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-lizzette-f-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack