Opinion
No. 2022-07685 Docket No. D-4284-22
07-12-2023
In the Matter of Yacere D. (Anonymous), appellant
Jordan M. Freundlich, Lake Success, NY, for appellant. Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Central Islip, NY (James G. Bernet of counsel), for respondent.
Jordan M. Freundlich, Lake Success, NY, for appellant.
Raymond A. Tierney, District Attorney, Central Islip, NY (James G. Bernet of counsel), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, LILLIAN WAN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, Yacere D. appeals from an order of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Fernando Camacho, J.), dated September 6, 2022. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied that branch of Yacere D.'s motion which was to expunge all records relating to the testing of a sample of his DNA pursuant to Executive Law § 995-c(9)(b).
ORDERED that on the Court's own motion, the notice of appeal is deemed to be an application for leave to appeal, and leave to appeal is granted (see Family Ct Act § 1112[a]); and it is further, ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
This proceeding arises out of a fatal collision on the Southern State Parkway in Suffolk County. The driver of the offending vehicle fled the scene. The appellant, who was 15 years old at the time of the collision, was arrested after a DNA report indicated that a sample of his DNA matched DNA recovered from the offending vehicle.
Following a fact-finding hearing, the Family Court found, inter alia, that the appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of manslaughter in the second degree, assault in the third degree, reckless endangerment in the second degree, and reckless driving, and adjudicated him a juvenile delinquent. Subsequently, the appellant moved, among other things, to expunge all records relating to the testing of his DNA sample pursuant to Executive Law § 995-c(9)(b). The appeal is from an order which denied that branch of the appellant's motion.
Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Family Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying that branch of his motion which was to expunge all records relating to the testing of his DNA sample pursuant to Executive Law § 995-c(9)(b) (cf. Matter of Francis O., 208 A.D.3d 51, 60-61; Matter of John R., 69 Misc.3d 493, 504-505 [Fam Ct, NY County]).
DILLON, J.P., IANNACCI, MALTESE and WAN, JJ., concur.