Matter of Eduardo E.

Matter of Eduardo E. 2012 NY Slip Op 00246 Decided on January 17, 2012 Appellate Division, First Department 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.

Decided on January 17, 2012
Tom, J.P., Catterson, DeGrasse, Richter, Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
6561

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

Presentment Agency


Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Selene
D'Alessio of counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Julie
Steiner of counsel), for presentment agency.

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Nancy M. Bannon, J.), entered on or about December 13, 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 sexual abuse in the second degree, incest in the third degree, and sexual misconduct, and placed him on enhanced supervision probation for a period of 18 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied appellant's motion to suppress his statement to the police. The totality of the circumstances establishes that the statement was voluntarily made (see Arizona v Fulminante, 499 US 279, 285-288 [1991]; People v Anderson, 42 NY2d 35, 38-39 [1977]). There is no evidence that appellant had any mental impairment that would affect his ability to understand Miranda warnings. Appellant turned 16 years of age between the incident and the interrogation; therefore, the special statutory procedures for juvenile interrogations were not required (see Family Court Act § 305.2[2]; Matter of Christopher QQ, 40 AD3d 1183 [2007]).

The fact-finding determination was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not [*2]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.

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

ENTERED: JANUARY 17, 2012

CLERK