Opinion
April 28, 1994
Appeal from the Family Court, New York County (Bruce M. Kaplan, J.).
The Family Court's denial of respondent's motion to dismiss the petition on speedy trial grounds was proper. The minutes of the November 17, 1992 proceeding, which indicate that no exception was taken to the court's proposed adjournment date, are "sufficiently clear to permit the conclusion that the adjournment was granted on consent" (Matter of Hiram D., 189 A.D.2d 730, 732). In any event, "good cause" existed under Family Court Act § 340.1 (4) to postpone the fact finding hearing "beyond the 60-day period [following the initial appearance] for up to 30 days" (Matter of Nakia L., 81 N.Y.2d 898, 901); no one disputed the court's contention that the presentment agency was having difficulty in obtaining certain grand jury minutes or that the hearing should not proceed until they were obtained. Finally, we note that since only one adjournment was sought and since the hearing was held less than 90 days following the arraignment, the court acted with "due regard to the stated legislative goal of prompt adjudication" (Matter of Frank C., 70 N.Y.2d 408, 414).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.