In re Rafael S.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Rafael S.

15 A.D.3d 189, 788 N.Y.S.2d 604, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 954

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 15 A.D.3d 189 (In re Rafael S.) 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 Rafael S., 15 A.D.3d 189, 788 N.Y.S.2d 604, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 954 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about January 9, 2004, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the second and third degrees and obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 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 credibility (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The credible evidence disproved appellant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Appellant’s claim regarding the charge of obstructing governmental administration is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would reject it. Concur — Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Marlow, Sullivan and Williams, 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 January 9, 2004, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the second and third degrees and obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 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 credibility (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). The credible evidence disproved appellant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Appellant’s claim regarding the charge of obstructing governmental administration is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would reject it. Concur — Saxe, J.P., Friedman, Marlow, Sullivan and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.3d 189, 788 N.Y.S.2d 604, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 954, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-rafael-s-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack