In re David H., 69 N.Y.2d 792 (1987)

In juvenile delinquency proceedings, a finding must be supported by sufficient evidence demonstrating that the juvenile committed acts that, if committed by an adult, would constitute a crime.

Summary

This case concerns a juvenile delinquency proceeding where the Family Court found that a 12-year-old committed acts constituting unlawful imprisonment and attempted sexual abuse. The Court of Appeals affirmed the finding of unlawful imprisonment but reversed the finding of attempted sexual abuse due to insufficient evidence. The Court held that while the agency proved the use of force, it failed to provide sufficient evidence that the appellant attempted to subject the victim to sexual contact. This case highlights the importance of presenting adequate evidence to support each element of the alleged offense in juvenile delinquency cases.

Facts

A witness heard screaming from the floor above her apartment. Shortly thereafter, she observed David H., a 12-year-old, pulling a five-year-old girl, Amanda, down the stairs. Amanda had a bruise on her forearm and scratches on her neck. Her overalls were damaged. Amanda’s mother had not given David permission to interact with her child.

Procedural History

The Family Court found that David H. committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute unlawful imprisonment in the second degree and attempted sexual abuse in the first degree. The Appellate Division affirmed. David H. appealed to the Court of Appeals.

Issue(s)

1. Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the Family Court’s finding that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute unlawful imprisonment in the second degree?

2. Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the Family Court’s finding that appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute attempted sexual abuse in the first degree?

Holding

1. Yes, because there was evidence that the appellant forcibly restrained the child without permission.

2. No, because there was no evidence that appellant attempted to subject the victim to sexual contact.

Court’s Reasoning

Regarding unlawful imprisonment, the court found sufficient evidence based on witness testimony that the appellant pulled the child down the stairs, causing injuries and damage to her clothing, without permission. The court inferred force was used, supporting the unlawful imprisonment charge.

Regarding attempted sexual abuse, the court found insufficient evidence. The presentment agency needed to prove that appellant attempted to subject Amanda to sexual contact. Medical examination revealed no evidence of sexual contact. Amanda was deemed incompetent to testify. The court found the pubic hair evidence unreliable. The court stated, “Finally, the child’s overalls — though dirty and damaged — proved only that appellant unlawfully restrained Amanda, not that he attempted to engage in any sexual contact.” The Court emphasized that while a completed crime need not be proven, some evidence of attempted sexual contact was required, which was lacking in this case. Because the evidence only supported unlawful restraint, the appellate court reversed the lower court’s ruling on attempted sexual abuse.