In re Raven L.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Raven L.

105 A.D.3d 424, 961 N.Y.S.2d 776

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

DecidedApril 2, 2013

StatusPublished

This text of 105 A.D.3d 424 (In re Raven L.) 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 Raven L., 105 A.D.3d 424, 961 N.Y.S.2d 776 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about September 8, 2011, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon her admission that she committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 15 months, with restitution of $200, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Since appellant seeks to replace her juvenile delinquency adjudication with an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, the fact that her term of probation has expired does not render this appeal moot. However, we dismiss the appeal “upon the ground that the dispositional order was entered upon appellant’s consent and thus [s]he is not an aggrieved party within the meaning of CPLR 5511” (Matter of Desmond S., 97 NY2d 693, 693 [2002]). In any event, the disposition was the least restrictive alternative and was a proper exercise of discretion.

Concur—Friedman, J.E, Sweeny, Renwick, Richter and Román, JJ.

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

Appeal from order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about September 8, 2011, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon her admission that she committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 15 months, with restitution of $200, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Since appellant seeks to replace her juvenile delinquency adjudication with an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, the fact that her term of probation has expired does not render this appeal moot. However, we dismiss the appeal “upon the ground that the dispositional order was entered upon appellant’s consent and thus [s]he is not an aggrieved party within the meaning of CPLR 5511” (Matter of Desmond S., 97 NY2d 693, 693 [2002]). In any event, the disposition was the least restrictive alternative and was a proper exercise of discretion.

Concur—Friedman, J.E, Sweeny, Renwick, Richter and Román, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 A.D.3d 424, 961 N.Y.S.2d 776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-raven-l-nyappdiv-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack