Court Opinion

ID: 5678480
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 14:50:47.21575+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:39:50.063914
License: Public Domain

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (Lubow, J.), dated December 4, 2003, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated October 24, 2003, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of assault in the second degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent and placed him on probation for a period of 12 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated October 24, 2003.
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency, we find that it was legally sufficient to support the determination made in the fact-finding order (see Matter of Benjamin J., 10 AD3d 608 [2004]; Matter of Joseph J., 205 AD2d 777 [1994]; Matter of Stafford B., 187 AD2d 649 [1992]). Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as *694the weight to be accorded to the evidence, are primarily questions to be determined by the trier of fact, which saw and heard the witnesses (see Matter of Dennis G., 294 AD2d 501 [2002]; Matter of Stafford B., supra; cf. People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84 [1903]). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see Matter of Dennis G., supra; Matter of Stafford B., supra; cf. People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86 [1974]). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the findings of fact were not against the weight of the evidence. Florio, J.P., Smith, Rivera and Fisher, JJ., concur.