Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Daqwan J.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK APPELLATE DIVISION: SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT


December 16, 2008

IN THE MATTER OF DAQWAN J. (ANONYMOUS), APPELLANT.

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Nassau County (Lawrence, J.), dated December 18, 2007, which, upon the appellant's admission, found that he violated a condition of a term of probation previously imposed by the same court in an order of disposition dated September 11, 2007, placing him on probation for a period of two years effective September 11, 2007, vacated the order of disposition dated September 11, 2007, and placed the appellant with the Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 18 months.

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., DANIEL D. ANGIOLILLO, RANDALL T. ENG and ARIEL E. BELEN, JJ.

(Docket No. D-10047-06)

DECISION & ORDER

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

Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion in placing him with the Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 18 months upon his admission that he violated a condition of his probation imposed in an order of disposition dated September 11, 2007. The Family Court has broad discretion in entering dispositional orders (see Family Ct Act § 141; Matter of Felipe G., 34 AD3d 477, 477; Matter of Neville G., 293 AD2d 471, 471). The record demonstrates that since October 2006 the appellant had violated a condition of his probation three times. The Family Court's determination reflected careful consideration of the less-restrictive alternatives to the appellant's placement and properly balanced the needs of the appellant and the need for the protection of the community (see Family Ct Act § 352.2[2]). Moreover, as the appellant violated a condition of his probation imposed on September 11, 2007, he was no longer entitled to a dispositional hearing pursuant to Family Court Act * 360.3(6) (see Matter of Edwin L., 88 NY2d 593, 601).

In addition, the Family Court properly exercised its discretion in declining to credit the appellant's detention time toward his placement under the dispositional order (see Family Ct Act § 353.3[5]; Matter of Kenyetta F., 49 AD3d 540, 541; Matter of Rashaad C., 28 AD3d 348, 348-349; Matter of Nikson D., 15 AD3d 656, 656).

The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.

RIVERA, J.P., ANGIOLILLO, ENG and BELEN, JJ., concur.

20081216

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.