Yvette H. v. Michael G.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yvette H. v. Michael G.

270 A.D.2d 123, 704 N.Y.S.2d 573, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2985

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 270 A.D.2d 123 (Yvette H. v. Michael 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

Yvette H. v. Michael G., 270 A.D.2d 123, 704 N.Y.S.2d 573, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2985 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order of protection, Family Court, Bronx County (Myra Martinez-Perez, J.), entered on or about September 18, 1997, requiring respondent to stay away from petitioner upon findings that respondent committed acts that constitute harassment in the second degree and menacing in the third degree, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding of harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26 [3]) is supported by the evidence of respondent’s threat against petitioner and of the prior order of protection in favor of petitioner and against respondent (cf., People v Hogan, 172 Misc 2d 279, 282). The finding of menacing in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.15) is supported by the threat and the fright caused by respondent’s unexpected presence, resulting in petitioner’s need to run away. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Order of protection, Family Court, Bronx County (Myra Martinez-Perez, J.), entered on or about September 18, 1997, requiring respondent to stay away from petitioner upon findings that respondent committed acts that constitute harassment in the second degree and menacing in the third degree, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding of harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26 [3]) is supported by the evidence of respondent’s threat against petitioner and of the prior order of protection in favor of petitioner and against respondent (cf., People v Hogan, 172 Misc 2d 279, 282). The finding of menacing in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.15) is supported by the threat and the fright caused by respondent’s unexpected presence, resulting in petitioner’s need to run away. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Lerner and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 123, 704 N.Y.S.2d 573, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2985, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yvette-h-v-michael-g-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack