In re Oscar A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Oscar A.

40 A.D.3d 267, 833 N.Y.S.2d 393

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

DecidedMay 3, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.3d 267 (In re Oscar A.) 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 Oscar A., 40 A.D.3d 267, 833 N.Y.S.2d 393 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Monica Drinane, J.), entered on or about December 22, 2005, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime 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.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning identification and credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The evidence established that appellant was not a bystander, but that he personally struck the victim in the head. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Monica Drinane, J.), entered on or about December 22, 2005, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime 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.

The court’s finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning identification and credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The evidence established that appellant was not a bystander, but that he personally struck the victim in the head. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.3d 267, 833 N.Y.S.2d 393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-oscar-a-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack