From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Carlos S

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 19, 2004
5 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

CAF 03-01994.

Decided March 19, 2004.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Bernadette T. Romano, J.), entered January 2, 2003. The order adjudged that respondent is a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation for one year.

WILLIAM L. KOSLOSKY, LAW GUARDIAN, UTICA, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

ONEIDA COUNTY ATTORNEY, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: WISNER, J.P., HURLBUTT, KEHOE, LAWTON, AND HAYES, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondent appeals from an order of disposition that adjudged him a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation for one year. Contrary to the contention of respondent, Family Court did not assume a prosecutorial role in the proceedings, in violation of his due process rights. Rather, the court fulfilled its "vital role in clarifying confusing testimony and facilitating the orderly and expeditious progress of the trial" ( People v. Yut Wai Tom, 53 N.Y.2d 44, 57).


Summaries of

In the Matter of Carlos S

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 19, 2004
5 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

In the Matter of Carlos S

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF CARLOS S., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 19, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
773 N.Y.S.2d 653

Citing Cases

Ronda E. F. v. Leroy M. C.

Contrary to respondent's argument, improperly raised for the first time on appeal, the Support Magistrate did…

In the Matter of Roque

Although "a trial judge may intervene in a trial to clarify confusing testimony and facilitate the orderly…