Matter of Ruvolo v Herrera
2009 NY Slip Op 04247 [62 AD3d 1012]
May 26, 2009
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, July 1, 2009


In the Matter of Charles Ruvolo, III, Respondent,
v
LaurenM. Herrera, Appellant.

[*1]Robin N. Guttman, Melville, N.Y., for appellant.

Chas G. Cancellare, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Curtis R. Exum of counsel), for respondent.

In a child custody proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother appealsfrom an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (James, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated May 2, 2008,which, after a hearing, granted the father's petition for sole custody of the subject child.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The mother's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel rests partially on matter which isdehors the record and not properly before this Court on this appeal (see Matter of Mikhail V., 12 AD3d375 [2004]; Matter of RashawnL.B., 8 AD3d 267 [2004]). To the extent this claim is reviewable, the evidence, the law,and the circumstances of this case, viewed in totality and as of the time of representation, revealthat counsel provided meaningful representation (see Matter of Julies R., 250 AD2d 855[1998]; Matter of Donald K., 211 AD2d 791 [1995]). Fisher, J.P., Covello, Angiolilloand Leventhal, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.