Opinion
2014-08386 Docket No. D-10181/13.
12-16-2015
In the Matter of DASHAWN B. (Anonymous), appellant.
Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and John A. Newbery of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Scott Shorr and Diana Lawless of counsel), for respondent.
Seymour W. James, Jr., New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and John A. Newbery of counsel), for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Scott Shorr and Diana Lawless of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion
Appeal from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Terrence J. McElrath, J.), dated July 22, 2014. The order adjudicated Dashawn B. a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation for a period of 18 months. The appeal brings up for review a fact-finding order of that court dated March 25, 2014, which found that Dashawn B. committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of attempted robbery in the second degree and attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree.
ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The appellant contends that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the findings that he committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of attempted robbery in the second degree and attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree. To the extent that the appellant challenges the legal sufficiency of the proof regarding larcenous intent, an attempt to take property, and the use of force, his arguments are unpreserved for appellate review since he failed to specifically assert such arguments before the Family Court (see Matter of Myron J., 123 A.D.3d 1030, 1031, 999 N.Y.S.2d 169; Matter of Christopher H., 123 A.D.3d 713, 713–714, 997 N.Y.S.2d 682; Matter of Rodolfo M., 79 A.D.3d 752, 752, 911 N.Y.S.2d 913; cf. CPL 470.052 ). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see Family Ct. Act § 342.22; Matter of David H., 69 N.Y.2d 792, 793, 513 N.Y.S.2d 111, 505 N.E.2d 621; cf. People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of attempted robbery in the second degree and attempted grand larceny in the fourth degree (see Matter of Myron J., 123 A.D.3d at 1031–1032, 999 N.Y.S.2d 169; People v. Toney, 12 A.D.3d 623, 624, 786 N.Y.S.2d 541; People v. Wilson, 10 A.D.3d 460, 461, 781 N.Y.S.2d 162; cf. Matter of Robert C., 67 A.D.3d 790, 791, 888 N.Y.S.2d 192; Matter of Shawn V., 4 A.D.3d 369, 369–370, 771 N.Y.S.2d 180).
Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see Matter of Chakelton M., 111 A.D.3d 732, 733, 975 N.Y.S.2d 95; Matter of Danielle B., 94 A.D.3d 757, 758, 941 N.Y.S.2d 685; cf. CPL 470.155 ), we nevertheless accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see Matter of Myron J., 123 A.D.3d at 1031, 999 N.Y.S.2d 169; Matter of Christopher H., 123 A.D.3d at 713, 997 N.Y.S.2d 682; Matter of Chakelton M., 111 A.D.3d at 733, 975 N.Y.S.2d 95). Upon reviewing the record, we are satisfied that the Family Court's fact-finding determinations were not against the weight of the evidence.
The appellant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see Matter of Anthony R., 43 A.D.3d 939, 940, 841 N.Y.S.2d 642; Matter of Nasheem P., 23 A.D.3d 662, 664, 805 N.Y.S.2d 409; cf. CPL 470.052 ) and, in any event, without merit.