Matter of Shawndell F.

Annotate this Case
Matter of Shawndell F. 2013 NY Slip Op 00433 Decided on January 29, 2013 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 January 29, 2013
Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, Richter, Gische, Clark, JJ.


[*1]9097 In re Shawndell F., A Person Alleged tobe a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

Presentment Agency


Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York
(Raymond
E. Rogers of counsel), for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jacob
Gardener of counsel), for presentment agency.

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Sidney Gribetz, J.), entered on or about January 20, 2012, 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 robbery in the second degree and menacing in the third degree, and placed him on probation for a period of nine months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly exercised its discretion when it denied appellant's request for an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, and instead adjudicated him a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation, which was the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant's needs and the community's need for protection (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]). The nine-month period of supervision was warranted by the seriousness of the offense, in which appellant intentionally struck the victim and attempted to steal his property with accomplices present, as well as appellant's generally poor academic performance and behavior at school. These factors were not outweighed by the mitigating factors cited by appellant.

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

ENTERED: JANUARY 29, 2013

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.