In re Yovanny G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Yovanny G.

303 A.D.2d 336, 755 N.Y.S.2d 846, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3237

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

DecidedMarch 27, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 303 A.D.2d 336 (In re Yovanny G.) 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 Yovanny G., 303 A.D.2d 336, 755 N.Y.S.2d 846, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sheldon Rand, J.), entered on or about January 11, 2002, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and imposed a conditional discharge for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including questions as to the officer’s ability to observe the transaction, were properly considered by the trier of facts and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations. Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Williams and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Sheldon Rand, J.), entered on or about January 11, 2002, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, and imposed a conditional discharge for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including questions as to the officer’s ability to observe the transaction, were properly considered by the trier of facts and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations. Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Williams and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 336, 755 N.Y.S.2d 846, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-yovanny-g-nyappdiv-2003.