In re Troy J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Troy J.

216 A.D.2d 395, 628 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6189

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

DecidedJune 12, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 395 (In re Troy J.) 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 Troy J., 216 A.D.2d 395, 628 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6189 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

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, Kings County (Schechter, J.), dated February 6, 1991, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated June 26, 1990, made upon the admission of the appellant, finding that he had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed him with the Division for Youth for a period not to exceed 18 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated June 26, 1990.

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

The appellant’s contention that he was deprived of his right to a speedy dispositional hearing is unpreserved for appellate review (see, e.g., Matter of Michael P., 213 AD2d 717; Matter of Eugene S., 200 AD2d 574; Matter of Ralph D., 163 AD2d 752) and, in any event, without merit (see, Matter of Michael P., supra; Matter of Kasheen A., 197 AD2d 572).

The appellant’s challenge to the severity of his placement is academic. Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, 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, Kings County (Schechter, J.), dated February 6, 1991, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated June 26, 1990, made upon the admission of the appellant, finding that he had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed him with the Division for Youth for a period not to exceed 18 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated June 26, 1990.

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

The appellant’s contention that he was deprived of his right to a speedy dispositional hearing is unpreserved for appellate review (see, e.g., Matter of Michael P., 213 AD2d 717; Matter of Eugene S., 200 AD2d 574; Matter of Ralph D., 163 AD2d 752) and, in any event, without merit (see, Matter of Michael P., supra; Matter of Kasheen A., 197 AD2d 572).

The appellant’s challenge to the severity of his placement is academic. Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 395, 628 N.Y.S.2d 518, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-troy-j-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack