Opinion
CAF 01-01575
October 1, 2002.
Appeal from an order of Family Court, Erie County (Rosa, J.), entered March 22, 2001, which adjudged that Yusef P. is a permanently neglected child, transferred respondent's guardianship and custody rights to petitioner, and authorized petitioner to consent to the child's adoption.
CHARLES J. GREENBERG, BUFFALO, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
DAVID C. SCHOPP, THE LEGAL AID BUREAU OF BUFFALO, INC., LAW GUARDIAN, BUFFALO (CHARLES D. HALVORSEN OF COUNSEL), FOR YUSEF P.
PRESENT: PINE, J.P., HURLBUTT, KEHOE, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum:
Family Court properly adjudged that respondent's son is a permanently neglected child, transferred respondent's guardianship and custody rights to petitioner, and authorized petitioner to consent to the child's adoption. The record supports the court's determination that the termination of respondent's parental rights is in the best interests of the child ( see Matter of Nathaniel T., 67 N.Y.2d 838, 842; Matter of Katherine D., 275 A.D.2d 985) and, in view of respondent's drug use and history of mental illness, the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to enter a suspended judgment ( see generally Matter of Matthew H., 274 A.D.2d 975, 975-976). Respondent failed to preserve for our review her contention that the testimony of the child's foster mother was immaterial and irrelevant ( see Matter of Patrick H., 226 A.D.2d 921, 923; Matter of Elizabeth Q., 126 A.D.2d 905, 906) and, in any event, that contention is lacking in merit. Furthermore, the court did not err in admitting the hearsay testimony of one of petitioner's caseworkers at the dispositional hearing ( see Family Ct Act § 624; Matter of George A., 257 A.D.2d 620, 620-621; cf. Matter of Nicole Lee B., 256 A.D.2d 1103), and thus respondent's counsel was not remiss in failing to object to that testimony. Finally, ineffectiveness of respondent's counsel may not be "inferred merely because [he] counseled respondent to admit [to] the allegations in the petition" ( Matter of Nasir H., 251 A.D.2d 1010, 1010, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 809; see also Matter of Michael W., 266 A.D.2d 884, 884-885). It is clear from the statements of respondent's counsel to the court that respondent's decision to admit to the allegations of permanent neglect was a matter of strategy.