| Matter of Ashanti R. |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 07850 [66 AD3d 1031] |
| October 27, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Ashanti R., an Infant. Westchester CountyDepartment of Social Services, Respondent; Felicia R., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 1.) In theMatter of Ajee R., an Infant. Westchester County Department of Social Services, Respondent;Felicia R., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 2.) In the Matter of Tyjiri R., an Infant. WestchesterCounty Department of Social Services, Respondent; Felicia R., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 3.) Inthe Matter of Sarai R., an Infant. Westchester County Department of Social Services,Respondent; Felicia R., Appellant. (Proceeding No. 4.) |
—[*1] Charlene M. Indelicato, County Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Stacey Dolgin-Kmetz andMary Lynn Nicolas-Brewster of counsel), for respondent. Theresa M. Danielle, White Plains, N.Y., attorney for the children.
In four related child protective proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, themother appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, WestchesterCounty (Davidson, J.), entered June 16, 2008, which, after a hearing, determined that she hadneglected the subject children, placed the child Ashanti R. in the custody of the Commissioner ofSocial Services, and placed the children Ajee R., Tyjiri R., and Sarai R. in the custody of theirmaternal aunt.[*2]
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order offact-finding and disposition as placed the child Ashanti R. in the custody of the Commissioner ofSocial Services is dismissed as academic, as Ashanti R. has reached 18 years of age; and it isfurther,
Ordered that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed,without costs or disbursements.
A neglected child is one whose "physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impairedor is in imminent danger of becoming impaired as" a result of the failure of his parent or otherperson legally responsible for his care to exercise a minimum degree of care "in providing thechild with proper supervision or guardianship, by unreasonably inflicting or allowing to beinflicted harm, or a substantial risk thereof" (Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; seeMatter of Chanika B., 60 AD3d 671, 671-672 [2009]). A single incident may suffice tosustain a finding of neglect (see Matter of Sheneika V., 20 AD3d 541 [2005]; Matterof Victoria CC., 256 AD2d 931, 932 [1998]). With respect to issues of credibility, thefindings of the hearing court, which saw and heard the witnesses, are accorded deference (seeMatter of Steven Glenn R., 51 AD3d 802, 803 [2008]).
Contrary to the mother's contention, the evidence was sufficient to establish by apreponderance of the evidence that she neglected the subject children. In addition to the evidenceof an incident that occurred in the early morning hours of September 19, 2006, which alone wassufficient to support the finding of neglect, we note also that the mother had previously engagedin a pattern of erratic conduct toward the children that demonstrated her inability to protect themfrom future harm (see Matter of Lester M., 44 AD3d 944, 945 [2007]).
The mother's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or withoutmerit. Fisher, J.P., Covello, Angiolillo and Roman, JJ., concur.