Opinion
15849.
10-13-2015
In re LISA W., Petitioner–Respondent, v. JOHN M., Respondent–Appellant.
Andrew J. Baer, New York, for appellant. Lisa W., New York, respondent pro se. Julian A. Hertz, Somers, attorney for the child.
Andrew J. Baer, New York, for appellant.
Lisa W., New York, respondent pro se.
Julian A. Hertz, Somers, attorney for the child.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., RENWICK, ANDRIAS, and MANZANET–DANIELS, JJ.
Opinion Order, Family Court, New York County (Fiordaliza A. Rodriguez, Special Referee), entered on or about May 20, 2014, which upon a fact-finding determination that respondent committed the family offenses of harassment in the second degree, criminal mischief in the fourth degree and disorderly conduct, granted a final order of protection against respondent in favor of petitioner and her son Aaron for a period of two years from the date of issuance, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of vacating the findings of criminal mischief in the fourth degree and disorderly conduct, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.To the extent the order was based on criminal mischief and disorderly conduct, the determination was unsupported by the record (see Matter of Janice M. v. Terrance J., 96 A.D.3d 482, 483, 945 N.Y.S.2d 693 [1st Dept. 2012] ; Penal Law §§ 145.00, 240.20 ). However, the court's finding that respondent committed harassment in the second degree has a sound and substantial basis in the record (see Matter of Everett C. v. Oneida P., 61 A.D.3d 489, 878 N.Y.S.2d 301 [1st Dept.2009] ; Penal Law § 240.26[3] ). The court's finding that petitioner's testimony was more credible than respondent's testimony is entitled to great deference (see Matter of Peter G. v. Karleen K., 51 A.D.3d 541, 856 N.Y.S.2d 859 [1st Dept.2008] ). Accepting petitioner's version of the facts as true, petitioner was threatened, or at least seriously annoyed, by respondent's repeated, strange and threatening behavior in September and October of 2012.