Matter of Tione M.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Tione M.

137 A.D.3d 443, 25 N.Y.S.3d 871

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

DecidedMarch 3, 2016

Docket373 372

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A.D.3d 443 (Matter of Tione 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

Matter of Tione M., 137 A.D.3d 443, 25 N.Y.S.3d 871 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Passidomo, J.), entered on or about December 16, 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 menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 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. The victim’s testimony established that appellant, while acting in concert with others, chased the victim and demanded money from him, causing him to reasonably fear an attack (see Matter of Orenzo H., 33 AD3d 492 [1st Dept 2006]). This evidence supported the elements of third-degree menacing. Appellant’s alternative interpretations of these events are unavailing.

Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Passidomo, J.), entered on or about December 16, 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 menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 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. The victim’s testimony established that appellant, while acting in concert with others, chased the victim and demanded money from him, causing him to reasonably fear an attack (see Matter of Orenzo H., 33 AD3d 492 [1st Dept 2006]). This evidence supported the elements of third-degree menacing. Appellant’s alternative interpretations of these events are unavailing.

Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A.D.3d 443, 25 N.Y.S.3d 871, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-tione-m-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack