In the Matter of BRANDON R., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York
2012
956 N.Y.S.2d 886
Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
The court’s finding was supported by sufficient evidence and 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, including its finding that there was nothing on a surveillance videotape that would render the victim’s testimony incredible. To the extent appellant is arguing that the court erred in admitting certain hearsay testimony under the excited utterance exception, that claim is unavailing. In its decision, the court expressly disclaimed any reliance on the excited utterance. In any event, it was properly admitted.
As the presentment agency concedes, the third-degree sexual abuse count should have been dismissed as a lesser included offense. Concur—Friedman, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
