Opinion
May 1, 1995
Appeal from the Family Court, Kings County (Lubow, J.).
Ordered that the orders of disposition are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Upon this record, we find no violation of Family Court Act § 341.2 (3). The appellant's mother had actual notice of the hearing and the court was led to believe that the person accompanying the appellant during his admission of guilt was a person responsible for the appellant's care (see, Matter of Felicia C., 178 A.D.2d 530; Matter of Dennis NN., 107 A.D.2d 914, 915; Matter of Lloyd P., 99 A.D.2d 812, 813).
The appellant's contention, raised for the first time on appeal, that the speedy disposition provisions of the Family Court Act were violated, is untimely (see, Matter of Lukisha C., 213 A.D.2d 401). We decline to consider the merits of this contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.