In re Tina P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Tina P.

135 A.D.2d 1105, 524 N.Y.S.2d 112, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52966

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

DecidedDecember 18, 1987

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 135 A.D.2d 1105 (In re Tina P.) 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 Tina P., 135 A.D.2d 1105, 524 N.Y.S.2d 112, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52966 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Reversal of the order adjudicating respondent a juvenile delinquent is mandated because the procedures set forth in Family Court Act § 321.3 (1) were not followed (see, Matter of Delfin A., 123 AD2d 318; Matter of Joseph G., 52 AD2d 924; Sobie, Practice Commentary, McKinney’s Cons [1106]*1106Laws of NY, Book 29A, Family Ct Act § 321.3). The admission to the allegations of the petition was made by the attorney and not by respondent personally, and the court did not ascertain through allocution that respondent admitted to the acts alleged in the petition, that she voluntarily waived her rights to a fact-finding hearing, and that she was aware of possible dispositional orders. As expressly provided by subdivision (1) (c) of section 321.3, "The provisions of this subdivision shall not be waived.” (Appeal from order of Erie County Family Court, Sedita, J. — violation of probation.) Present— Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Reversal of the order adjudicating respondent a juvenile delinquent is mandated because the procedures set forth in Family Court Act § 321.3 (1) were not followed (see, Matter of Delfin A., 123 AD2d 318; Matter of Joseph G., 52 AD2d 924; Sobie, Practice Commentary, McKinney’s Cons [1106]*1106Laws of NY, Book 29A, Family Ct Act § 321.3). The admission to the allegations of the petition was made by the attorney and not by respondent personally, and the court did not ascertain through allocution that respondent admitted to the acts alleged in the petition, that she voluntarily waived her rights to a fact-finding hearing, and that she was aware of possible dispositional orders. As expressly provided by subdivision (1) (c) of section 321.3, "The provisions of this subdivision shall not be waived.” (Appeal from order of Erie County Family Court, Sedita, J. — violation of probation.) Present— Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 A.D.2d 1105, 524 N.Y.S.2d 112, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52966, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-tina-p-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack