In re Victor M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Victor M.

44 A.D.3d 410, 843 N.Y.S.2d 252

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

DecidedOctober 11, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 44 A.D.3d 410 (In re Victor 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 Victor M., 44 A.D.3d 410, 843 N.Y.S.2d 252 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Nelida Malave-Gonzalez, J.), entered on or about November 6, 2006, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree and resisting arrest, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based upon legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The obstructing charge was established by evidence that appellant used physical force to prevent officers from performing the official act of removing him from a school principal’s office where he had been behaving disruptively (see Penal Law § 195.05). Appellant then put up a struggle, resisting the officers’ attempts to lawfully arrest him on the obstructing charge (see Penal Law § 205.30). We have considered and rejected appellant’s remaining arguments. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Williams, Buckley and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Nelida Malave-Gonzalez, J.), entered on or about November 6, 2006, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree and resisting arrest, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was based upon legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The obstructing charge was established by evidence that appellant used physical force to prevent officers from performing the official act of removing him from a school principal’s office where he had been behaving disruptively (see Penal Law § 195.05). Appellant then put up a struggle, resisting the officers’ attempts to lawfully arrest him on the obstructing charge (see Penal Law § 205.30). We have considered and rejected appellant’s remaining arguments. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Williams, Buckley and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A.D.3d 410, 843 N.Y.S.2d 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-victor-m-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack