In re Orenzo H.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Orenzo H.

33 A.D.3d 492, 822 N.Y.S.2d 532

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

DecidedOctober 24, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 33 A.D.3d 492 (In re Orenzo H.) 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 Orenzo H., 33 A.D.3d 492, 822 N.Y.S.2d 532 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about October 19, 2005, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he commit[493]*493ted acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Appellant failed to preserve his challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would conclude that the court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence. We find that the court’s finding was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility and identification. The victim’s testimony fully established the element of physical injury (see People v Guidice, 83 NY2d 630, 636 [1994]; People v Dailey, 222 AD2d 278 [1995], lv denied 87 NY2d 971 [1996]). Appellant’s actions in chasing the victim, causing him to fear an attack, evinced the requisite intent for menacing in the third degree (see Matter of Salah S., 203 AD2d 368 [1994]). Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Saxe, Sullivan and McGuire, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about October 19, 2005, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he commit[493]*493ted acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Appellant failed to preserve his challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would conclude that the court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence. We find that the court’s finding was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility and identification. The victim’s testimony fully established the element of physical injury (see People v Guidice, 83 NY2d 630, 636 [1994]; People v Dailey, 222 AD2d 278 [1995], lv denied 87 NY2d 971 [1996]). Appellant’s actions in chasing the victim, causing him to fear an attack, evinced the requisite intent for menacing in the third degree (see Matter of Salah S., 203 AD2d 368 [1994]). Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Saxe, Sullivan and McGuire, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.3d 492, 822 N.Y.S.2d 532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-orenzo-h-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack