Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: LEON T., A Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant. Presentment Agency.
Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Alma Cordova, J.), entered on or about June 15, 2004, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon his admission of an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of attempted assault in the second degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
In his application to withdraw his admission, appellant did not raise his current challenges to the court's allocution procedure, and we decline to review these unpreserved claims in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the allocution met all constitutional requirements (see Matter of Jermaine J., 6 A.D.3d 87, 775 N.Y.S.2d 287 [2004], lv. denied 3 N.Y.3d 606, 785 N.Y.S.2d 23, 818 N.E.2d 665 [2004] ). Appellant's principal complaint concerns the sequence of events at his allocution. The court first asked appellant if he intended to admit to the particular criminal act in question and obtained an affirmative response; it then thoroughly explained the rights appellant was waiving; and it finally elicited appellant's formal admission to attempting to seriously injure the victim. We find nothing defective about this sequence. Appellant's assertion that he was forced to “incriminate” himself prior to receiving any warnings is meritless; the admission had no “incriminating” effect until it was finally accepted by the court.
The court properly denied appellant's motion to withdraw his admission (see People v. Frederick, 45 N.Y.2d 520, 410 N.Y.S.2d 555, 382 N.E.2d 1332 [1978] ). The record establishes the voluntariness of the admission, and appellant did not offer any substantial reason for withdrawal.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 17, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)