| Matter of Victor I. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 09996 [57 AD3d 778] |
| December 16, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Victor I., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent,Appellant. |
—[*1] Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Kristin M. Helmers and NormanCorenthai of counsel), for respondent.
In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from anorder of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Modica, J.), dated February 26, 2008,which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated January 7, 2008, made after a hearing, findingthat the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted thecrimes of attempted assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree, adjudged him to be ajuvenile delinquent and placed him under the supervision of the New York City Department ofProbation in the County of Queens for a period of one year. The appeal brings up for review thefact-finding order dated January 7, 2008.
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see Matter ofDavid H., 69 NY2d 792, 793 [1987]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish that theappellant committed acts, which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes ofattempted assault in the third degree and menacing in the third degree (see Matter of Monay W., 33 AD3d809, 810 [2006]; Matter of Tiffany M.,24 AD3d 556 [2005]). Moreover, in conducting an independent review of the weight of theevidence (cf. CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord greatdeference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observedemeanor (cf. People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946[2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, weare satisfied that the findings of [*2]fact were not against the weight ofthe evidence (cf. People v Romero, 7NY3d 633 [2006]). Mastro, J.P., Florio, Eng and Chambers, JJ., concur.