| Matter of Amilya Jayla S. (Princess Debbie A.) |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 03285 [83 AD3d 582] |
| April 26, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| In the Matter of Amilya Jayla S., a Child Alleged to be PermanentlyNeglected. Princess Debbie A., Appellant; Abbott House,Respondent. |
—[*1] Magovern & Sclafani, New York (Frederick J. Magovern of counsel), for respondent. Neil D. Futerfas, White Plains, Attorney for the Child.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Gloria Sosa-Lintner, J.), entered onor about October 23, 2009, which, upon a finding of permanent neglect, terminated respondentmother's parental rights to the subject child and committed the custody and guardianship of thechild to petitioner agency and the Commissioner of the Administration for Children's Servicesfor the purpose of adoption, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The finding of permanent neglect was supported by clear and convincing evidence(see Social Services Law § 384-b [7] [a]). The record shows that the agencyexercised diligent efforts to encourage and strengthen the parental relationship by, among otherthings, offering the mother referrals for required services and scheduling visitation (see Matter of Lady Justice I., 50 AD3d425, 426 [2008]). Despite these efforts, the mother failed during the statutorily relevant timeperiod to maintain contact with the child through consistent and regular visitation or to plan forthe child's future by completing required programs (see id.; see also Matter ofLamikia Shawn S., 276 AD2d 279 [2000]).
A preponderance of the evidence shows that it would be in the child's best interests totransfer her custody and guardianship to the petitioning agency and free her for adoption by herfoster mother, with whom she has lived for more than four years (see Matter of Star LeslieW., 63 NY2d 136, 147-148 [1984]).
Given the mother's history of nonappearance, Family Court providently exercised itsdiscretion in refusing to grant the mother further adjournments and in striking her testimony inthe fact-finding and dispositional hearings upon her failure to appear for cross-examination (see Matter of Leala T., 55 AD3d997, 998 [2008]).
We have considered the mother's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, DeGrasse, Freedman and Richter, JJ.