Matter of Nyree R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Nyree R.

132 A.D.3d 526, 17 N.Y.S.3d 856

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

DecidedOctober 20, 2015

Docket15911

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.3d 526 (Matter of Nyree R.) 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 Nyree R., 132 A.D.3d 526, 17 N.Y.S.3d 856 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

*527 Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Passidomo, J.), entered March 31, 2014, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of endangering the welfare of a child, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was supported by 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. Evidence that appellant exposed his penis in front of the three-year-old victim, only 10 inches from the child’s face, supported the conclusion that appellant acted in a manner likely to cause harm to the child (see Penal Law § 260.10 [1]; People v Simmons, 92 NY2d 829 [1998]). The circumstances of the incident could reasonably be interpreted as evincing appellant’s consciousness of guilt, and demonstrating his knowledge that his conduct was likely to cause harm.

The court properly admitted an out-of-court statement by the nontestifying victim, because it qualified as an excited utterance (see People v Edwards, 47 NY2d 493 [1979]). In any event, any error in this regard was harmless. We note that the court made no mention of this evidence in its detailed findings of fact, which marshaled the other evidence.

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

*527 Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Passidomo, J.), entered March 31, 2014, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of endangering the welfare of a child, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was supported by 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. Evidence that appellant exposed his penis in front of the three-year-old victim, only 10 inches from the child’s face, supported the conclusion that appellant acted in a manner likely to cause harm to the child (see Penal Law § 260.10 [1]; People v Simmons, 92 NY2d 829 [1998]). The circumstances of the incident could reasonably be interpreted as evincing appellant’s consciousness of guilt, and demonstrating his knowledge that his conduct was likely to cause harm.

The court properly admitted an out-of-court statement by the nontestifying victim, because it qualified as an excited utterance (see People v Edwards, 47 NY2d 493 [1979]). In any event, any error in this regard was harmless. We note that the court made no mention of this evidence in its detailed findings of fact, which marshaled the other evidence.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.3d 526, 17 N.Y.S.3d 856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-nyree-r-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack