| Matter of Shields v Brown |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 04816 [107 AD3d 1005] |
| June 26, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Evelyn Shields,Respondent, v Gary Brown, Appellant. |
—[*1] Janis A. Parazzelli, Floral Park, N.Y., for respondent. Simone Gordon, Jamaica, N.Y., attorney for the child.
In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Gary Brownappeals from an order of protection of the Family Court, Queens County (Lebwohl, J.),dated February 23, 2012, which, after a hearing, in effect, determined that he committedthe family offenses of harassment in the second degree and disorderly conduct, anddirected him, inter alia, to refrain from harassing, intimidating, or threatening thepetitioner.
Ordered that the order of protection is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
"The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue tobe resolved by the hearing court (see Family Ct Act §§ 812, 832; Matter of Halper v Halper, 61AD3d 687 [2009]; Matterof Lallmohamed v Lallmohamed, 23 AD3d 562 [2005]), and that court'sdetermination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appealunless clearly unsupported by the record (see Matter of Gray v Gray, 55 AD3d 909 [2008]; Matter of Wallace v Wallace,45 AD3d 599 [2007])" (Matter of Creighton v Whitmore, 71 AD3d 1141, 1141[2010]; see Matter of Kaur vSingh, 73 AD3d 1178, 1178 [2010]). Here, a fair preponderance of the credibleevidence elicited at the fact-finding hearing supports the hearing court's determinationthat Gary Brown committed the family offenses of harassment in the second degree anddisorderly conduct, warranting the issuance of an order of protection (see PenalLaw §§ 240.26, 240.20; Family Ct Act § 812 [1]; Matter of Smith v Amedee,101 AD3d 1033, 1033 [2012]; Matter of Scanziani v Hairston, 100 AD3d 1007, 1008[2012]; Matter of Cruz vRodriguez, 96 AD3d 838, 838 [2012]; Matter of Yalvac v Yalvac, 83 AD3d 853, 854 [2011];Matter of Kaur v Singh, 73 AD3d at 1178; Matter of Creighton v Whitmore,71 AD3d at 1141; Matter ofGray v Gray, 55 AD3d 909, 910 [2008]; Matter of Robbins v Robbins, 48 AD3d 822, 822 [2008]).Rivera, J.P., Dillon, Dickerson and Austin, JJ., concur.