Matter of Arcis A.R.-M. (Alton T.Y.)

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Arcis A.R.-M. (Alton T.Y.)

2017 NY Slip Op 2428, 148 A.D.3d 1156, 49 N.Y.S.3d 760

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 29, 2017

Docket2016-02667

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 2428 (Matter of Arcis A.R.-M. (Alton T.Y.)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Matter of Arcis A.R.-M. (Alton T.Y.), 2017 NY Slip Op 2428, 148 A.D.3d 1156, 49 N.Y.S.3d 760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Caren Loguercio, J.), dated February 9, 2016. The order, after a hearing, found that the appellant sexually abused the child Arcis A. R.-M., and derivatively neglected the child Andy J. R.-M.

Ordered that the order of fact-finding is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner, Suffolk County Department of Social Services, filed petitions alleging that the appellant sexually abused his stepdaughter, Arcis A. R.-M., and derivatively neglected his stepson, Andy J. R.-M., based on his sexual abuse of Arcis A. R.-M. After a fact-finding hearing, the Family Court issued an order of fact-finding dated February 9, 2016, finding that the appellant had sexually abused Arcis A. R.-M. and that he derivatively neglected Andy J. R.-M.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Family Court’s *1157 finding that he sexually abused the child Arcis A. R.-M. is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act §§ 1012 [e] [iii]; 1046 [b] [i]; Penal Law § 130.55). The testimony of the petitioner’s expert witness, who was an expert in the field of child abuse, and the out-of-court statements of Andy J. R.-M. to the caseworkers, provided sufficient corroboration to support the reliability of Arcis A. R.-M.’s out-of-court statements regarding the appellant’s sexual abuse of her (see Matter of Angel R. [Syheid R.], 136 AD3d 1041, 1041 [2016]).

Further, the appellant’s sexual abuse of Arcis A. R.-M. evinced a flawed understanding of his duties as a parent and impaired parental judgment sufficient to support the Family Court’s finding of derivative neglect of Andy J. R.-M. (see Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [i]; Matter of Sha-Naya M.S.C. [Derrick C.], 130 AD3d 719, 721 [2015]; Matter of Trenasia J. [Frank J.], 107 AD3d 992, 993-994 [2013]).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Eng, P.J., Hall, Roman and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order of fact-finding of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Caren Loguercio, J.), dated February 9, 2016. The order, after a hearing, found that the appellant sexually abused the child Arcis A. R.-M., and derivatively neglected the child Andy J. R.-M.

Ordered that the order of fact-finding is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The petitioner, Suffolk County Department of Social Services, filed petitions alleging that the appellant sexually abused his stepdaughter, Arcis A. R.-M., and derivatively neglected his stepson, Andy J. R.-M., based on his sexual abuse of Arcis A. R.-M. After a fact-finding hearing, the Family Court issued an order of fact-finding dated February 9, 2016, finding that the appellant had sexually abused Arcis A. R.-M. and that he derivatively neglected Andy J. R.-M.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Family Court’s *1157 finding that he sexually abused the child Arcis A. R.-M. is supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Ct Act §§ 1012 [e] [iii]; 1046 [b] [i]; Penal Law § 130.55). The testimony of the petitioner’s expert witness, who was an expert in the field of child abuse, and the out-of-court statements of Andy J. R.-M. to the caseworkers, provided sufficient corroboration to support the reliability of Arcis A. R.-M.’s out-of-court statements regarding the appellant’s sexual abuse of her (see Matter of Angel R. [Syheid R.], 136 AD3d 1041, 1041 [2016]).

Further, the appellant’s sexual abuse of Arcis A. R.-M. evinced a flawed understanding of his duties as a parent and impaired parental judgment sufficient to support the Family Court’s finding of derivative neglect of Andy J. R.-M. (see Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [i]; Matter of Sha-Naya M.S.C. [Derrick C.], 130 AD3d 719, 721 [2015]; Matter of Trenasia J. [Frank J.], 107 AD3d 992, 993-994 [2013]).

The appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit.

Eng, P.J., Hall, Roman and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 2428, 148 A.D.3d 1156, 49 N.Y.S.3d 760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-arcis-ar-m-alton-ty-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack