In re Malcolm M.
Opinion of the Court
The petition was not jurisdictionally defective. The petition, on its face, clearly indicates that the affiant had personal knowledge as to all the essential elements of the charges (see Family Ct Act § 311.2 [3]; Matter of Edward B., 80 NY2d 458 [1992]).
The court’s finding was supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning identification and credibility. Concur—Buckley, EJ., Ellerin, Lerner, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.