In re Stanley F.
| Decision Date | 28 September 2010 |
| Parties | In the Matter of STANLEY F. (Anonymous), appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
76 A.D.3d 1069
In the Matter of STANLEY F. (Anonymous), appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Sept. 28, 2010.
Emmanuel Ntiamoah, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Pamela Seider Dolgow and Fay Ng of counsel), for respondent.
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, and L. PRISCILLA HALL, JJ.
In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Turbow, J.), dated June 11, 2009, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated April 21, 2009, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of reckless endangerment in the second degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed him with the New York State Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 12 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact finding order dated April 21,2009.
ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed
ORDERED that the order of disposition is reversed insofar as reviewed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the fact-finding order dated April 12, 2009, is vacated.
The appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the appellant with the New York State Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 12 months has been rendered academic, as the period of placement has expired ( see Matter of Vanna W., 45 A.D.3d 855, 846 N.Y.S.2d 354; Matter of Sydney N., 42 A.D.3d 539, 840 N.Y.S.2d 128; Matter of Christian M., 37 A.D.3d 834, 831 N.Y.S.2d 247). However, because there may be collateral consequences resulting from the adjudication of delinquency, the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as adjudicated the appellant a juvenile delinquent and which brings up for review the fact-finding order, has not been rendered academic ( see Family Ct. Act § 783; Matter of Dorothy D., 49 N.Y.2d 212, 424 N.Y.S.2d 890, 400 N.E.2d 1342).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency ( see Matter of David H., 69 N.Y.2d 792, 793, 513 N.Y.S.2d 111, 505 N.E.2d 621;
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Villano v. Strathmore Terrace Homeowners Ass'n, Inc.
...is fact-specific, and usually a question for a jury" ( Shah v. Mercy Med. Ctr., 71 A.D.3d at 1120, 898 N.Y.S.2d 589). Moreover, "[a]908 N.Y.S.2d 127condition that is ordinarily apparent to a person making reasonable use of his or her senses may be rendered a trap for the unwary where the co......
-
Monos v. Monos
...degree (Penal Law § 120.20 ; see generally People v. Davis, 72 N.Y.2d 32, 36, 530 N.Y.S.2d 529, 526 N.E.2d 20 ; Matter of Stanley F., 76 A.D.3d 1069, 1070, 908 N.Y.S.2d 127 ; cf. Matter of Kadeem W., 5 N.Y.3d 864, 808 N.Y.S.2d 130, 842 N.E.2d 15 ; Matter of George V., 231 A.D.2d 641, 647 N.......
-
In re Stanley F.
...accord great deference to the opportunity of the trier of fact to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor ( see 76 A.D.3d 1069Matter of Daniel R., 51 A.D.3d 933, 856 N.Y.S.2d 876; cf. People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 410, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053, cert. denied 54......
-
Lashlee v. Lashlee
...endangerment cannot be found "in the absence of actual and ‘substantial risk of serious physical injury’ " (Matter of Stanley F., 76 A.D.3d 1069, 1071, 908 N.Y.S.2d 127, quoting Penal Law § 120.20 ). Even construing the petition liberally and giving the father the benefit of every favorable......