Matter of Dorian L.

Annotate this Case
Matter of Dorian L. 2012 NY Slip Op 01179 Decided on February 16, 2012 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on February 16, 2012
Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta, Renwick, Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
6513

[*1]In re Dorian L., A Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

Presentment Agency


Tamara A Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Marcia
Egger of counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York
(Mordecai Newman of counsel), for presentment agency.

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Allen G. Alpert, J.), entered on or about September 1, 2010, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crimes of assault in the second degree, attempted assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 18 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 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations. The evidence disproved appellant's justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

To the extent the court erred in denying appellant's request for a missing witness charge, the error was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of appellant's guilt (see People v Fields, 76 NY2d 761 [1990]; People v Abelson, 27 AD3d 301 [2006]). Appellant's remaining contention is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 16, 2012

CLERK

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.