From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Miriam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 20, 1990
165 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

September 20, 1990

Appeal from the Family Court of Otsego County (Mogavero, Jr., J.).


Respondent contends that her right to counsel was abridged by Family Court's failure to afford counsel an opportunity to make a closing statement at the hearing (see, Family Ct Act § 342.1). Since respondent's counsel neither requested the opportunity to make a closing argument nor objected to Family Court's apparent oversight in failing to ask counsel if he wished to make a closing statement, the issue has not been preserved for review (see, Matter of Van Alstyne v. David Q., 92 A.D.2d 971, 972). We also reject respondent's argument that Family Court's determination is not based upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The uncontradicted testimony of two sworn witnesses establishes that respondent committed the acts charged in the petition. Respondent's appellate arguments directed at the credibility of those witnesses are unavailing (see, Matter of Michael D., 109 A.D.2d 633, 634, affd 66 N.Y.2d 843).

Order affirmed, without costs. Kane, J.P., Casey, Weiss, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Miriam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 20, 1990
165 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Matter of Miriam

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MIRIAM MM., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Sep 20, 1990

Citations

165 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
561 N.Y.S.2d 315

Citing Cases

Williams v. State

We agree. By failing to request that the court draw an adverse inference as a result of the State's…

Saratoga Spa & Bath, Inc. v. Beeche Systems Corp.

We also find no merit to Campbell's contention that Supreme Court erred in prohibiting it from presenting a…