Opinion
2012-06-13
In the Matter of Blanca CRUZ, respondent, v. Arcadio RODRIGUEZ, appellant.
Larry S. Bachner, Jamaica, N.Y., for appellant. Dean Kusakabe, Forest Hills, N.Y., for respondent.
Larry S. Bachner, Jamaica, N.Y., for appellant. Dean Kusakabe, Forest Hills, N.Y., for respondent.
In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Arcadio Rodriguez appeals from an order of protection of the Family Court, Queens County (Lebwohl, J.), dated November 16, 2011, which, after a hearing and, in effect, upon a finding that he had committed the family offenses of menacing in the third degree and disorderly conduct, directed him, inter alia, to stay away from the petitioner until and including November 16, 2013.
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 to be resolved by the hearing court” (Matter of Creighton v. Whitmore, 71 A.D.3d 1141, 1141, 898 N.Y.S.2d 585;seeFamily Ct. Act §§ 812, 832; Matter of Armstrong v. Ewing, 82 A.D.3d 1092, 919 N.Y.S.2d 343;Matter of Kaur v. Singh, 73 A.D.3d 1178, 900 N.Y.S.2d 895), and that court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to considerable deference on appeal ( see Matter of Creighton v. Whitmore, 71 A.D.3d at 1141, 898 N.Y.S.2d 585;see Matter of Kaur v. Singh, 73 A.D.3d at 1178, 900 N.Y.S.2d 895). Contrary to the appellant's contention, a fair preponderance of the credible evidence supported the Family Court's determination that he committed acts which constituted the family offenses of menacing in the third degree and disorderly conduct, warranting the issuance of an order of protection ( seePenal Law §§ 120.15, 240.20; Family Ct. Act 812[1]; Matter of Armstrong v. Ewing, 82 A.D.3d at 1093, 919 N.Y.S.2d 343;Matter of Pearlman v. Pearlman, 78 A.D.3d 711, 911 N.Y.S.2d 87;Matter of Kaur v. Singh, 73 A.D.3d at 1178, 900 N.Y.S.2d 895).
The appellant's remaining contention is without merit.