In re Daniel D.
Opinion of the Court
—In a juvenile de
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court’s decision with respect to the disposition demonstrated that it carefully considered the least restrictive alternative consistent with the needs of the juvenile and the need for protection of the community. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the Family Court improvidently exercised its discretion in placing the appellant with the Division for Youth (see, Family Ct Act § 352.2; Matter of Jason W., 207 AD2d 495). Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Thompson and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.