Opinion
2013-06-5
In the Matter of Alberto BAZANTE, respondent, v. Annabel BAZANTE, appellant.
Brian J. Davis, P.C., Garden City, N.Y., for appellant.
, P.J., REINALDO E. RIVERA, PLUMMER E. LOTT, and JEFFREY A. COHEN, JJ.
In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the former wife appeals from an order of protection of the Family Court, Nassau County (Aaron, J.), dated August 31, 2012, which, after a hearing, and upon a finding that she committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree, directed her, inter alia, to stay away from the former husband for a period up to and including August 30, 2013.
ORDERED that the order of protection is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
A family offense must be established by a fair preponderance of the evidence ( seeFamily Ct. Act § 832; Matter of Salazar v. Melendez, 97 A.D.3d 754, 755, 948 N.Y.S.2d 673;Matter of Vankeuren v. Craft, 39 A.D.3d 763, 832 N.Y.S.2d 444). The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court, and that court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal unless clearly unsupported by the record ( see Matter of Winfield v. Gammons, 105 A.D.3d 753, 963 N.Y.S.2d 272;Matter of Jackson v. Idlett, 103 A.D.3d 723, 959 N.Y.S.2d 706;Matter of Fleming v. Fleming, 52 A.D.3d 600, 601, 859 N.Y.S.2d 739;Matter of Robbins v. Robbins, 48 A.D.3d 822, 851 N.Y.S.2d 877). Here, contrary to the former wife's contentions, the Family Court's determination that she committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree, which was based upon its assessmentof the credibility of the parties, is supported by the record ( seePenal Law § 240.26[3]; Matter of Winfield v. Gammons, 105 A.D.3d 753, 963 N.Y.S.2d 272), and warranted the issuance of the order of protection ( see Matter of Robbins v. Robbins, 48 A.D.3d at 822, 851 N.Y.S.2d 877).