In re Oscar C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Oscar C.

227 A.D.2d 308, 642 N.Y.S.2d 681, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6033

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

DecidedMay 28, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 227 A.D.2d 308 (In re Oscar C.) 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 C., 227 A.D.2d 308, 642 N.Y.S.2d 681, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6033 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Jody Adams, J.), entered [309]*309May 25, 1994, which adjudicated respondent-appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of robbery in the third degree, and placed him with the Division for Youth for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Family Court’s finding that the complainant had an independent source for his in-court identification of appellant is supported by clear and convincing evidence, in light of the complainant’s ample opportunity to view appellant from inches away in daylight when his jacket was stolen, his having seen appellant the day before the incident (see, Matter of Eric W., 182 AD2d 439), and his unshakable testimony that he would have identified appellant even without first having seen the photograph improperly shown to him by the arresting officer. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Wallach, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Jody Adams, J.), entered [309]*309May 25, 1994, which adjudicated respondent-appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of robbery in the third degree, and placed him with the Division for Youth for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Family Court’s finding that the complainant had an independent source for his in-court identification of appellant is supported by clear and convincing evidence, in light of the complainant’s ample opportunity to view appellant from inches away in daylight when his jacket was stolen, his having seen appellant the day before the incident (see, Matter of Eric W., 182 AD2d 439), and his unshakable testimony that he would have identified appellant even without first having seen the photograph improperly shown to him by the arresting officer. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Wallach, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D.2d 308, 642 N.Y.S.2d 681, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6033, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-oscar-c-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack