In re Marcus B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Marcus B.

48 A.D.3d 677, 850 N.Y.S.2d 921

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

DecidedFebruary 19, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.3d 677 (In re Marcus B.) 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 Marcus B., 48 A.D.3d 677, 850 N.Y.S.2d 921 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

In ajuvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, [678]*678the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Weinstein, J.), dated March 29, 2007, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated February 1, 2007, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of robbery in the second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, attempted assault in the third degree, and menacing in the third degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated February 1, 2007.

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

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see Matter of David H., 69 NY2d 792 [1987]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the appellant’s identity as one of the perpetrators beyond a reasonable doubt (see Family Ct Act § 342.2 [2]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we find that the court’s findings of fact were not against the weight of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 342.2 [2]; Matter of Shawn D., 40 AD3d 632 [2007]). Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Angiolillo and Carni, JJ., concur.

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

In ajuvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, [678]*678the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Weinstein, J.), dated March 29, 2007, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated February 1, 2007, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of robbery in the second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, attempted assault in the third degree, and menacing in the third degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated February 1, 2007.

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

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see Matter of David H., 69 NY2d 792 [1987]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the appellant’s identity as one of the perpetrators beyond a reasonable doubt (see Family Ct Act § 342.2 [2]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we find that the court’s findings of fact were not against the weight of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 342.2 [2]; Matter of Shawn D., 40 AD3d 632 [2007]). Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Angiolillo and Carni, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.3d 677, 850 N.Y.S.2d 921, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-marcus-b-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack