In re Jaquan R.
Opinion of the Court
Orders of disposi
The court’s fact-finding determination was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations.
The dispositional orders were proper exercises of discretion. Placement at Graham Windham was the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant’s needs and the community’s need for protection (see Matter of Katherine W., 62 NY2d 947 [1984]), given the serious and repeated nature of appellant’s acts, which included witness-tampering, and appellant’s history of benefitting from residential placement. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Renwick, Freedman, Román and Gische, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.