In re Michael O.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Michael O.

141 A.D.2d 646, 529 N.Y.S.2d 997, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6648

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

DecidedJune 13, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 141 A.D.2d 646 (In re Michael O.) 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 Michael O., 141 A.D.2d 646, 529 N.Y.S.2d 997, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6648 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Torres, J.), dated November 25, 1986, which, upon a fact-finding order of the Family Court, Nassau County (De Maro, J.), dated September 18, 1986, made upon an admission, found that the appellant had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree and placed him on probation for a period of 18 months.

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

We find that the appellant’s admission was properly taken pursuant to an intelligent, knowing and voluntary waiver of his rights. The Family Court comprehensively apprised the appellant of his various constitutional and statutory rights and the consequences of a waiver thereof. In addition, the Family Court elicited sufficient statements from the appellant regarding the facts underlying his admission (see, Family Ct Act § 321.3 [1]). Lawrence, J. P., Kunzeman, Hooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Torres, J.), dated November 25, 1986, which, upon a fact-finding order of the Family Court, Nassau County (De Maro, J.), dated September 18, 1986, made upon an admission, found that the appellant had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree and placed him on probation for a period of 18 months.

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

We find that the appellant’s admission was properly taken pursuant to an intelligent, knowing and voluntary waiver of his rights. The Family Court comprehensively apprised the appellant of his various constitutional and statutory rights and the consequences of a waiver thereof. In addition, the Family Court elicited sufficient statements from the appellant regarding the facts underlying his admission (see, Family Ct Act § 321.3 [1]). Lawrence, J. P., Kunzeman, Hooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 A.D.2d 646, 529 N.Y.S.2d 997, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6648, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-michael-o-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack