In re Ramzy F.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Ramzy F.

79 A.D.3d 601, 912 N.Y.S.2d 879

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

DecidedDecember 21, 2010

StatusPublished

This text of 79 A.D.3d 601 (In re Ramzy F.) 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 Ramzy F., 79 A.D.3d 601, 912 N.Y.S.2d 879 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Robert R. Reed, J.), entered on or about November 19, 2009, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon his admission that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and placed him with the Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 12 months, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

Appellant’s challenge to the court’s dispositional order is moot, since he has already completed his placement (see Matter of Yuan Tung C., 296 AD2d 323 [2002]). Were we not dismissing the appeal as moot, we would find that the placement was a proper exercise of discretion. Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

Appeal from order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Robert R. Reed, J.), entered on or about November 19, 2009, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon his admission that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and placed him with the Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 12 months, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.

Appellant’s challenge to the court’s dispositional order is moot, since he has already completed his placement (see Matter of Yuan Tung C., 296 AD2d 323 [2002]). Were we not dismissing the appeal as moot, we would find that the placement was a proper exercise of discretion. Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 A.D.3d 601, 912 N.Y.S.2d 879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ramzy-f-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack