The Family Court found, after a fact-finding hearing, that the mother permanently neglected the child, and, after a dispositional hearing, the court terminated the mother's parental rights and transferred guardianship and custody of the child to the petitioner and the Commissioner of Social Services of the City of New York for the purpose of adoption. A respondent in a proceeding pursuant to Social Services Law § 384–b has the right to the assistance of counsel (see Family Ct Act 262[a][iv] ), which encompasses the right to the effective assistance of counsel (seeMatter of Louise M.L. [Melinda M.T.], 137 A.D.3d 915, 916, 25 N.Y.S.3d 904 ; Matter of Alfred C., 237 A.D.2d 517, 655 N.Y.S.2d 589 ). An attorney representing a client is entitled to make "strategic and tactical decisions concerning the conduct of trials" ( People v. Colon, 90 N.Y.2d 824, 826, 660 N.Y.S.2d 377, 682 N.E.2d 978 ; see e.g.People v. Colville, 20 N.Y.3d 20, 29, 955 N.Y.S.2d 799, 979 N.E.2d 1125 ; People v. Parker, 290 A.D.2d 650, 651, 736 N.Y.S.2d 162 ).
Contrary to the father's contention, the record establishes that he was afforded "meaningful representation" (Matter of Saini v Singh 132 A.D.3d 686; Matter of Alfred C., 237 A.D.2d 517).
On this record, we cannot conclude that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in dismissing those petitions without prejudice. Contrary to the father’s contention, the record establishes that he was afforded "meaningful representation" (Matter of Saini v. Singh, 132 A.D.3d 686, 17 N.Y.S.3d 308; Matter of Alfred C., 237 A.D.2d 517, 655 N.Y.S.2d 589).
The mother's contention that she was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is also without merit. The record shows that the mother was afforded meaningful representation, thereby satisfying the constitutional standard (seeMatter of Dean J.K. [Joseph D.K.], 121 A.D.3d 896, 897, 994 N.Y.S.2d 391 ; Matter of Alfred C., 237 A.D.2d 517, 517, 655 N.Y.S.2d 589 ). DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, BARROS and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.
The mother's contention that she was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is also without merit. The record shows that the mother was afforded meaningful representation, thereby satisfying the constitutional standard (see Matter of Dean J.K. [Joseph D.K.], 121 AD3d 896, 897; Matter of Alfred C., 237 AD2d 517, 517). DILLON, J.P., AUSTIN, BARROS and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.
The mother's contention that she was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel also is without merit. The record shows that the mother was afforded meaningful representation, thereby satisfying the constitutional standard (seeMatter of Dean J.K. [Joseph D.K.] , 121 A.D.3d 896, 897, 994 N.Y.S.2d 391 ; Matter of Alfred C. , 237 A.D.2d 517, 517, 655 N.Y.S.2d 589 ). MASTRO, J.P., MILLER, BARROS and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.
The mother's contention that she was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is without merit. The record shows that the mother was afforded meaningful representation, thereby satisfying the constitutional standard (seeMatter of Dean J.K. [Joseph D.K.], 121 A.D.3d 896, 994 N.Y.S.2d 391 ; Matter of Alfred C., 237 A.D.2d 517, 655 N.Y.S.2d 589 ). AUSTIN, J.P., HINDS–RADIX, MALTESE and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.
Accordingly, he was not entitled to vacatur of his conditional judicial surrender, and therefore, the court properly granted DCFS's motion to dismiss his petition (see Matter of Naquan L.G. [Carolyn C.], 140 AD3d 757, 759-760; Matter of Brittany R. [AnneMarie R.], 130 AD3d 1271, 1272). Contrary to the father's contention, he received meaningful representation during the surrender proceedings (see Family Ct Act § 262[a][i]; Matter of Alfred C., 237 AD2d 517). RIVERA, J.P., HALL, BARROS and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.
Accordingly, he was not entitled to vacatur of his conditional judicial surrender, and therefore, the court properly granted DCFS's motion to dismiss his petition (see Matter of Naquan L.G. [Carolyn C.], 140 A.D.3d 757, 759–760, 31 N.Y.S.3d 214 ; Matter of Brittany R. [Annemarie R.], 130 A.D.3d 1271, 1272, 13 N.Y.S.3d 692 ).Contrary to the father's contention, he received meaningful representation during the surrender proceedings (see Family Ct. Act § 262[a][i] ; Matter of Alfred C., 237 A.D.2d 517, 655 N.Y.S.2d 589 ).
Here, the court conducted a full fact-finding hearing on the violation petition, as well as a permanency hearing, and the record shows that it was aware of and considered the child's best interests (see Matter of Jeremiah J.W. [Tionna W.], 134 A.D.3d 848, 22 N.Y.S.3d 215 ; Matter of Carmen C. [Margarita N.], 95 A.D.3d 1006, 944 N.Y.S.2d 214 ).Viewed in totality, the record demonstrates that the mother was afforded the effective assistance of counsel (see Family Ct. Act § 262[a][i] ; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400 ; Matter of Alfred C., 237 A.D.2d 517, 655 N.Y.S.2d 589 ).