In re Tiffany M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Tiffany M.

24 A.D.3d 556, 808 N.Y.S.2d 287

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

DecidedDecember 12, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 24 A.D.3d 556 (In re Tiffany M.) 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 Tiffany M., 24 A.D.3d 556, 808 N.Y.S.2d 287 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Hunt, J.), dated October 26, 2004, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated September 17, 2004, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of attempted assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree, adjudicated her to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed her on probation for a period of 15 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated September 17, 2004.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see Matter of David H., 69 NY2d 792 [1987]; Matter of Rosario S., 18 AD3d 563 [2005]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of attempted assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree (see Matter of Fatia I., 21 AD3d 961 [2005]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the findings of fact were not against the weight of the evidence (see Matter of Fatia I., supra). Adams, J.P., S. Miller, Ritter and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Hunt, J.), dated October 26, 2004, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated September 17, 2004, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of attempted assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree, adjudicated her to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed her on probation for a period of 15 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated September 17, 2004.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see Matter of David H., 69 NY2d 792 [1987]; Matter of Rosario S., 18 AD3d 563 [2005]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of attempted assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree (see Matter of Fatia I., 21 AD3d 961 [2005]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the findings of fact were not against the weight of the evidence (see Matter of Fatia I., supra). Adams, J.P., S. Miller, Ritter and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.3d 556, 808 N.Y.S.2d 287, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-tiffany-m-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack