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: ISAIAH W., A Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant. Presentment Agency.
Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), entered on or about July 23, 2010, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of attempted assault in the second degree and obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court's finding was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ). There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations. The evidence established that appellant attempted to cause physical injury to a school employee (Penal Law § 120.05[10][a] ). Appellant grabbed, twisted, and shook his teacher's wrist while threatening to “deck” or “kill” him. This evidence warranted the inference that appellant intended to injure the teacher (see Matter of Tatiana N., 73 A.D.3d 186, 189–190, 899 N.Y.S.2d 21 [2010] ).
The evidence also established that appellant “attempted to prevent a public servant from performing an official function, by means of intimidation, physical force or interference, or by means of any independently unlawful act” (Penal Law § 195.05). Appellant persisted in wearing a hat in a classroom, in violation of a school rule. When the teacher confiscated the hat, he was performing an “official function” under the statute (see Matter of Sheyna T., 79 A.D.3d 449, 913 N.Y.S.2d 49 [2010] ). Appellant used force to prevent the teacher from retaining the hat.
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: May 10, 2011
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)