Matter of Shyquan M.
2014 NY Slip Op 01614 [115 AD3d 747]
March 12, 2014
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, April 30, 2014


In the Matter of Shyquan M., a Person Alleged to be aJuvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[*1]Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and Diane Pazar ofcounsel), for appellant.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Francis F. Caputo andBenjamin Welikson of counsel), for respondent.

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3,Shyquan M. appeals from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County(McElrath, J.), dated April 10, 2013, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same courtdated February 7, 2013, made after a hearing, finding that he committed acts which, ifcommitted by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of attempted gang assault inthe first degree, assault in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in thefourth degree, and menacing in the second degree, adjudicated him to be a juveniledelinquent, and, inter alia, placed him on probation for a period of 18 months anddirected him to perform 75 hours of community service.

Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Family Court has broad discretion in determining the proper disposition in ajuvenile delinquency proceeding (see Family Ct Act § 141; Matter of Tafari M., 90 AD3d1052, 1053 [2011]; Matterof Cooper C., 81 AD3d 643, 644 [2011]; Matter of Gustav D., 79 AD3d 868, 869 [2010]), and itsdetermination is accorded great deference (see Matter of Paul T., 107 AD3d 726, 727 [2013]; Matter of Donovan E., 92AD3d 881, 882 [2012]). Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Family Courtprovidently exercised its discretion in adjudicating him a juvenile delinquent and, interalia, placing him on probation for a period of 18 months and directing him to perform 75hours of community service (see Family Ct Act §§ 352.2 [1] [b];353.2). The disposition was appropriate in light of, among other factors, the seriousnessof the offenses, the recommendation made in the probation report, and the appellant'sexcessive absences from school, poor academic performance, and school suspensions (see Matter of Anthony G., 82AD3d 1235 [2011]; Matterof Liston J., 81 AD3d 648, 649 [2011]; Matter of Gustav D., 79 AD3dat 869). Rivera, J.P., Lott, Roman and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.