From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Neftali

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 2, 1994
204 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

May 2, 1994

Appeal from the Family Court, Westchester County (Spitz, J.).


Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Family Court properly denied his motion to dismiss the petition. The petition is sufficient on its face (see, Family Ct Act § 311.2), and it is properly supported by nonhearsay allegations in the form of a police report signed by one of the police-officer victims and certified by a police sergeant. In any event, we note that, when the appellant moved to dismiss the petition, the pretrial stages of the proceeding had already passed and the fact-finding stage had begun (Matter of Kareem T., 180 A.D.2d 802; Matter of Eric F., 126 A.D.2d 39). Thus, there was no longer a pressing need for an accusatory instrument that complied with Family Court Act § 311.2 (3) (see, Matter of Edward B., 80 N.Y.2d 458, 464; Matter of David T., 75 N.Y.2d 927, 929). "It follows that the need for — and the operative effect of — Family Court Act § 311.2 (3) are, at that point, dissipated" (Matter of Edward B., supra, at 465).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the petitioner, we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, it is well settled that the resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are questions to be determined by the fact finder, who had the opportunity to see and hear the witnesses (see, People v. Garay, 163 A.D.2d 582). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record. Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the finding of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).

We have reviewed the appellant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Miller, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Neftali

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 2, 1994
204 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Matter of Neftali

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of NEFTALI D., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 2, 1994

Citations

204 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
611 N.Y.S.2d 272

Citing Cases

In re Umar C.

Accordingly, in view of the particular circumstances of this case (see, Matter of Frank C., 70 N.Y.2d 408,…

Matter of Neftali D

Decided September 8, 1994 Appeal from (2d Dept: 204 A.D.2d 319) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL GRANTED OR…