Opinion
2016-10464, Docket No. O-2868-15.
07-19-2017
In the Matter of Nermin ARMANIOUS, respondent, v. George ARMANIOUS, appellant.
George Armanious, Staten Island, NY, appellant pro se. Larry S. Bachner, New York, NY, for respondent.
George Armanious, Staten Island, NY, appellant pro se.
Larry S. Bachner, New York, NY, for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., MARK C. DILLON, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, and ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.
Appeal by George Armanious from an order of protection of the Family Court, Richmond County (Alison M. Hamanjian, Ct. Att. Ref.), dated September 15, 2016. The order, upon a finding that the appellant committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree, made after a hearing, directed the appellant, among other things, to stay away from the petitioner until and including September 15, 2017.
ORDERED that the order of protection is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
In a family offense proceeding, the petitioner has the burden of establishing, by a fair preponderance of the evidence, that the charged conduct was committed as alleged in the petition (see Family Ct. Act § 832 ; Matter of Jordan v. Verni, 139 A.D.3d 1067, 1068, 30 N.Y.S.3d 841 ; Matter of Thompson v. Fawcett, 131 A.D.3d 620, 14 N.Y.S.3d 906 ; Matter of Pochat v. Pochat, 125 A.D.3d 660, 661, 3 N.Y.S.3d 112 ). The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the hearing court, and that court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on appeal unless clearly unsupported by the record (see Matter of Crenshaw v. Thorpe–Crenshaw, 146 A.D.3d 951, 952, 45 N.Y.S.3d 555 ; Matter of Konstatine v. Konstatine, 107 A.D.3d 994, 968 N.Y.S.2d 166 ). Here, according due deference to the credibility determinations of the Family Court, a fair preponderance of the evidence adduced at the fact-finding hearing supported a finding that the appellant committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree (see Penal Law § 240.26[1] ; Matter of Frimer v. Frimer, 143 A.D.3d 895, 896, 39 N.Y.S.3d 226 ; Matter of Molina v. Hart, 143 A.D.3d 723, 38 N.Y.S.3d 440 ; Matter of Savas v. Bruen, 139 A.D.3d 737, 738, 31 N.Y.S.3d 149 ). The court credited the testimony of the petitioner (see Matter of Kiani v. Kiani, 134 A.D.3d 1036, 1038, 22 N.Y.S.3d 520 ), and the court's determination is supported by the record. Thus, there is no basis to disturb the court's determination (see id. at 1038, 22 N.Y.S.3d 520 ).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.