Matter of Ariana Y.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Ariana Y.

132 A.D.3d 522, 17 N.Y.S.3d 854

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

DecidedOctober 20, 2015

Docket15907 15906

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.3d 522 (Matter of Ariana Y.) 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

Matter of Ariana Y., 132 A.D.3d 522, 17 N.Y.S.3d 854 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Gayle P. Roberts, J.), entered on or about June 4, 2014, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that she committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the second and third degrees and menacing in the third degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 12 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 credibility determinations. The evidence supported a finding that appellant was no mere onlooker, but an intentional participant in the offenses (see Penal Law § 20.00).

Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Gayle P. Roberts, J.), entered on or about June 4, 2014, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that she committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the second and third degrees and menacing in the third degree, and placed her on probation for a period of 12 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 credibility determinations. The evidence supported a finding that appellant was no mere onlooker, but an intentional participant in the offenses (see Penal Law § 20.00).

Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.3d 522, 17 N.Y.S.3d 854, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-ariana-y-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack