From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Gawen M.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 27, 2011
90 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

2011-12-27

In the Matter of GAWEN M. (Anonymous), appellant.

Geanine Towers, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. John Ciampoli, County Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Joseph A. Kellermann and Robert Vanderwaag of counsel), for respondent.


Geanine Towers, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant. John Ciampoli, County Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Joseph A. Kellermann and Robert Vanderwaag of counsel), for respondent.

In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, Gawen M. appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of disposition of the Family Court, Nassau County (Singer, J.), dated August 31, 2010, as, upon a fact-finding order of the same court dated June 10, 2010, made upon his admission, finding that he had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree, placed him in the custody of the New York State Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 15 months for placement in a residential treatment facility.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

The only issues raised by the appellant concern that portion of the order of disposition which placed him in the custody of the New York State Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 15 months for placement in a residential treatment facility. Since the placement ended, the appeal must be dismissed as academic ( see Matter of Eric R., 78 A.D.3d 841, 910 N.Y.S.2d 374; Matter of Ricardo Z., 75 A.D.3d 606, 904 N.Y.S.2d 907; Matter of Iyanna D., 74 A.D.3d 1061, 903 N.Y.S.2d 483; Matter of Trayvond W., 71 A.D.3d 683, 894 N.Y.S.2d 914; Matter of Ramon D., 70 A.D.3d 685, 892 N.Y.S.2d 876; Matter of Joseph R., 49 A.D.3d 651, 852 N.Y.S.2d 805; Matter of Daniel B., 41 A.D.3d 711, 838 N.Y.S.2d 179). Contrary to the appellant's contention, this matter does not warrant invoking the exception to the mootness doctrine ( see Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 714, 431 N.Y.S.2d 400, 409 N.E.2d 876).

FLORIO, J.P., BALKIN, BELEN and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re Gawen M.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 27, 2011
90 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

In re Gawen M.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of GAWEN M. (Anonymous), appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 27, 2011

Citations

90 A.D.3d 1051 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
934 N.Y.S.2d 839
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 9645

Citing Cases

In re Zawyer C.

ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements. The only issues raised by…

In re Widley M.

On appeal, the appellant's sole challenge is to the disposition placing him in the custody of the…