CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 2025 NY Slip Op 02377
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 24, 2025

Matter of A. WW.

This case involves an appeal concerning a juvenile delinquency adjudication against A. WW. She was initially taken to a hospital under a Mental Hygiene Law § 9.41 hold and subsequently slapped a DSS caseworker, leading to a juvenile delinquency proceeding for attempted assault. Despite being medically cleared, A. WW. remained in the hospital's emergency room for six months due to the inability to find suitable placement. She eventually admitted to the charge, was adjudicated delinquent, and placed in OCFS custody. The Appellate Division, Third Department, reversed the Family Court's order and dismissed the petition in the interest of justice, highlighting the non-serious nature of the crime and the systemic failure in providing appropriate care for A. WW., and stating that a juvenile delinquency proceeding should not be leveraged for placement.

Juvenile DelinquencyMental Health LawCapacity EvaluationFamily Court ActEffective Assistance of CounselInterest of Justice DismissalChild WelfareHospital BoardingAppellate ReviewAttempted Assault
References
37
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Wilinston BB

This appeal stems from a Family Court order in Albany County, adjudicating the respondent a juvenile delinquent. The respondent contested the Family Court's decision not to suppress his written confession, arguing it was involuntarily made. The appellate court, however, affirmed the Family Court's ruling, finding no evidence of coercion during police questioning and noting the appropriate handling of the respondent's mother's presence. While acknowledging certain evidentiary errors by the Family Court, the appellate panel deemed them harmless given the overwhelming evidence of the respondent's guilt. Consequently, the original order of juvenile delinquency adjudication was affirmed.

juvenile delinquencyconfessionsuppression of evidenceinvoluntary confessionFamily Court Actevidentiary rulingsharmless errorrape first degreesodomy first degreepolice questioning
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

United States v. Juvenile Male

The United States Government moved to transfer a juvenile male defendant, charged with four brutal, premeditated murders connected to the MS-13 street gang, to adult status for prosecution. Judge Joseph F. Bianco of the Eastern District of New York evaluated six statutory factors, including the defendant's age (nearly 18 at the time of the offense and 19 at the hearing), his supportive social background despite gang affiliation, and a lack of prior delinquency record. While some factors weighed against transfer, the severe nature of the alleged crimes and the low likelihood of rehabilitation within the juvenile justice system were found to overwhelmingly favor adult prosecution. The Court ultimately granted the government's motion, emphasizing public protection over the juvenile's rehabilitation potential given the gravity of the offenses.

juvenile justiceadult prosecutionMS-13gang violencemurderracketeeringtransfer motionrehabilitation potentialjudicial discretionstatutory factors
References
35
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 18, 1992

In re Nathan S.

This case involves an appeal from an order of the Family Court of Franklin County, which adjudicated a juvenile a delinquent for committing an act that would constitute third-degree burglary if committed by an adult. Following a dispositional hearing, the Family Court placed the juvenile in the custody of the Franklin County Commissioner of Social Services for 12 months, in a residential facility offering therapy, as recommended by a psychiatrist. The petitioner appealed on two grounds: first, that a less restrictive alternative (placement with parents) was not tried, and second, that the Law Guardian was granted unlimited direct access to information from the Department of Social Services case workers. The appellate court affirmed the placement decision, stating that the law does not require less restrictive alternatives to fail before more restrictive ones are imposed. However, the court modified the order by deleting the provision granting the Law Guardian unfettered access to Department records, finding insufficient factual basis for such broad access.

Juvenile DelinquencyFamily CourtDispositional HearingLeast Restrictive AlternativeChild WelfareCustody PlacementResidential FacilityPsychiatric EvaluationLaw Guardian AccessSocial Services Records
References
6
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 18, 2006

In re Timothy HH.

A 14-year-old respondent was adjudicated a juvenile delinquent by the Family Court of St. Lawrence County for criminal mischief in the fourth degree. The petitioner alleged the respondent damaged a car belonging to a St. Lawrence County Youth Advocacy Program worker who had impounded his puppies due to truancy. Respondent asserted a justification defense, believing the worker was stealing his pets. The Family Court rejected this defense and placed the respondent in the custody of the St. Lawrence County Commissioner of Social Services for one year. The appellate court affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding sufficient evidence to support the charge and disprove the justification defense, clarifying that Penal Law § 35.25 pertains to force against persons, not property.

Juvenile DelinquencyCriminal MischiefTruancyJustification DefenseFamily Court AppealProperty DamageAppellate ReviewPenal LawFamily Court ActSt. Lawrence County
References
9
Case No. 10-03-076-CV
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 31, 2003

in the Matter of D. T., a Juvenile

D.T., a juvenile, was found to have engaged in delinquent conduct by committing aggravated sexual assault and was committed to the Texas Youth Commission (TYC) for ten years. Almost two years later, TYC referred D.T. to the court for approval of his transfer to prison. The court ordered the transfer, and D.T. appealed, contending the court abused its discretion due to insufficient evidence and lack of rehabilitation opportunities provided by TYC. The appellate court reviewed the record, including D.T.'s extensive misconduct at TYC, his fluctuating academic progress, and his lack of progress in therapy. The court found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the transfer to prison, as it was not required to consider all statutory factors and its decision could be based on conflicting evidence. The court's order transferring D.T. to prison was affirmed.

Juvenile DelinquencyAggravated Sexual AssaultTexas Youth CommissionPrison TransferAbuse of DiscretionAppellate ReviewRehabilitationMisconductEvidence SufficiencyFamily Code
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
May 13, 1991

In re Hiram D.

The Family Court of New York County issued an order on May 13, 1991, adjudicating the respondent a juvenile delinquent and imposing an 18-month probation for acts including attempted robbery, grand larceny, assault, and criminal possession of a weapon. These charges stemmed from an incident on October 18, 1990, where the respondent and two accomplices attempted to rob a complainant, using a gun and physical force. The respondent was apprehended and identified by the victim near the crime scene. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Family Court's order, dismissing the respondent's contentions regarding insufficient identification evidence, noting that all participants shared criminal liability. Furthermore, the court found no violation of the respondent's right to a speedy fact-finding hearing, attributing delays to the respondent's waiver and a counsel-requested adjournment, thus timely commencing the hearing.

Juvenile DelinquencyAttempted RobberyGrand LarcenyAssaultCriminal Possession of a WeaponSpeedy HearingIdentificationAppellate ReviewProbationDue Process
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 25, 1992

In re Shawn V.

Respondent appealed an order from the Family Court of Montgomery County which adjudicated him a juvenile delinquent for petit larceny and placed him in a State Division for Youth facility for 12 months. Respondent argued that this placement was not the least restrictive available alternative under Family Court Act § 352.2 (2). The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court's decision, finding that extensive reports, including psychiatric, psychological, and probation reports, evidenced serious emotional and behavioral problems, a history of aggressive and antisocial conduct, and a clear threat to both himself and the community. Professionals consistently recommended secure placement, deeming direct community placement unwise due to the risk of continued antisocial behavior, and the examining psychologist indicated a risk of sex offense. The court concluded that ample evidence supported the Family Court's determination that placement in a Division for Youth facility was the appropriate least restrictive alternative.

Juvenile DelinquencyFamily Court ActLeast Restrictive AlternativeState Division for YouthPetit LarcenyBehavioral DisordersEmotional DisturbancesCommunity SafetyPsychiatric EvaluationProbation Report
References
4
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

In re Yovanny L.

This case addresses the accuracy of court interpreter translations in a juvenile delinquency proceeding. The Assistant Corporation Counsel moved to strike the complainant's testimony, alleging significant errors by the court-appointed Mandarin interpreter. After conducting a hearing and considering testimony from both the Assistant Corporation Counsel and the interpreter, the court acknowledged that some minor errors in translation and interpreter conduct occurred. However, the court ultimately found these errors to be isolated instances and not sufficiently serious or pervasive to cause major prejudice to any party. Consequently, the drastic remedy of striking the testimony and starting anew was denied, and the trial was ordered to resume with a different Mandarin interpreter.

Juvenile DelinquencyCourt InterpretersTranslation AccuracyDue Process RightsEvidentiary MotionTestimony AdmissibilityMandarin LanguageFamily Court ProcedureJudicial ReviewProcedural Errors
References
7
Case No. 2008 NY Slip Op 28029
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 29, 2008

Matter of Noel O.

This juvenile delinquency proceeding involved Noel O., accused of sex offenses against five-year-old Jessi M. The presentment agency sought to have Jessi M. declared a "vulnerable witness" under Family Court Act § 343.1 (4) and Criminal Procedure Law § 65.20, requesting her testimony via live, two-way closed-circuit television. The court, presided over by Judge John M. Hunt, considered expert psychological testimony from Dr. Mitchell Frank and Dr. Elizabeth Osborn, which highlighted Jessi M.'s significant fear, nightmares, and potential for severe emotional harm if required to testify in Noel O.'s presence. Applying a 2007 amendment, the court found clear and convincing evidence that Jessi M. was a vulnerable child witness due to her young age, the heinous nature of the alleged acts, Noel O.'s familial relationship, and the expert's assessment of psychological harm. Consequently, the court granted the motion, allowing Jessi M. to testify via closed-circuit television to prevent further trauma and ensure her ability to communicate effectively.

Juvenile DelinquencyVulnerable WitnessClosed-Circuit TelevisionChild AbuseSex OffenseWitness CompetencyConfrontation ClauseFamily Court ActCriminal Procedure LawExpert Testimony
References
39
Showing 1-10 of 200 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational