In re Claudina Paradise Damaris B.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Claudina Paradise Damaris B.

227 A.D.2d 135, 641 N.Y.S.2d 642, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4761

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 2, 1996·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Rita Bolstad, J.), entered April 11, 1994, terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject children upon a finding of mental illness, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding that respondent manifested a longstanding mental illness which prevented her from providing proper care for her children at present and in the foreseeable future was supported by clear and convincing evidence, and termination of parental rights was in the children’s best interest (see, Matter of Angela Marie N., 223 AD2d 423).

The record also reveals that respondent’s attorney provided meaningful assistance (see, Matter of Erin G., 139 AD2d 737, 739). The failure to call a rebuttal psychiatric witness, not shown to exist, does not indicate ineffectiveness (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147). We note the evidence of her lack of insight into her psychiatric problems and inability to care for her children was overwhelming.

Family Court also properly took judicial notice of mental health reports submitted in prior neglect proceedings, which reports were considered by the psychiatric expert in making his diagnosis (see, Social Services Law § 384-b [6] [e]). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Rita Bolstad, J.), entered April 11, 1994, terminating respondent’s parental rights to the subject children upon a finding of mental illness, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court’s finding that respondent manifested a longstanding mental illness which prevented her from providing proper care for her children at present and in the foreseeable future was supported by clear and convincing evidence, and termination of parental rights was in the children’s best interest (see, Matter of Angela Marie N., 223 AD2d 423).

The record also reveals that respondent’s attorney provided meaningful assistance (see, Matter of Erin G., 139 AD2d 737, 739). The failure to call a rebuttal psychiatric witness, not shown to exist, does not indicate ineffectiveness (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 146-147). We note the evidence of her lack of insight into her psychiatric problems and inability to care for her children was overwhelming.

Family Court also properly took judicial notice of mental health reports submitted in prior neglect proceedings, which reports were considered by the psychiatric expert in making his diagnosis (see, Social Services Law § 384-b [6] [e]). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.

In re Claudina Paradise Damaris B., 227 A.D.2d 135, 641 N.Y.S.2d 642, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4761 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

227 A.D.2d 135 (In re Claudina Paradise Damaris B.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related