In re Timothy M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Timothy M.

55 A.D.3d 478, 868 N.Y.S.2d 6

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

DecidedOctober 30, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 55 A.D.3d 478 (In re Timothy 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 Timothy M., 55 A.D.3d 478, 868 N.Y.S.2d 6 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.), entered January 23, 2008, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a finding that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted robbery in the first and second degrees, attempted assault in the second and third degrees, and attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree, and placed him in the custody of the Office of Children and Family Services 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 (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence established that this incident was an attempted gunpoint robbery rather than a mere altercation, and it disproved appellant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Concur—Lippman, RJ., Mazzarelli, Williams, Buckley and Renwick, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, New York County (Mary E. Bednar, J.), entered January 23, 2008, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a finding that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted robbery in the first and second degrees, attempted assault in the second and third degrees, and attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree, and placed him in the custody of the Office of Children and Family Services 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 (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence established that this incident was an attempted gunpoint robbery rather than a mere altercation, and it disproved appellant’s justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt. Concur—Lippman, RJ., Mazzarelli, Williams, Buckley and Renwick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 A.D.3d 478, 868 N.Y.S.2d 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-timothy-m-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack