Matter of Ramon A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Ramon A.

125 A.D.3d 494, 999 N.Y.S.2d 894

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 2015

Docket14229

StatusPublished

This text of 125 A.D.3d 494 (Matter of Ramon A.) 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 Ramon A., 125 A.D.3d 494, 999 N.Y.S.2d 894 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about September 12, 2013, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree (two counts) and sexual abuse in the first degree (two counts), and placed him on enhanced supervised probation for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was not against the weight of the evidence. The court had the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses, and there is no basis for disturbing its credibility determinations. The evidence fails to support appellant’s suggestion that the victim’s mother may have induced the victim to make false accusations.

Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Acosta, Saxe, Manzanet-Daniels and Clark, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about September 12, 2013, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree (two counts) and sexual abuse in the first degree (two counts), and placed him on enhanced supervised probation for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding was not against the weight of the evidence. The court had the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses, and there is no basis for disturbing its credibility determinations. The evidence fails to support appellant’s suggestion that the victim’s mother may have induced the victim to make false accusations.

Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Acosta, Saxe, Manzanet-Daniels and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 A.D.3d 494, 999 N.Y.S.2d 894, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-ramon-a-nyappdiv-2015.