From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Zachary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 24, 1993
198 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

November 24, 1993

Appeal from the Family Court of Ulster County (Peters, J.).


Respondent was adjudicated a person in need of supervision (hereinafter PINS) after he admitted the allegations contained in the petition. Having waived a dispositional hearing, he consented to a term of probation and was then placed on probation for a period of one year by Family Court. Now claiming that his admission allocution was fatally defective because Family Court failed to inform him of his rights as prescribed in Family Court Act § 321.3 and in addition that the court failed to state the reasons for its disposition as required by Family Court Act § 754 (2), respondent appeals.

We affirm. As we have recently indicated, the requirements of Family Court Act § 321.3 do not apply to PINS proceedings under Family Court Act article 7 (see, Matter of Jason O., 197 A.D.2d 784). Accordingly, Family Court's failure to comply with the mandates contained in that section does not constitute reversible error in this PINS proceeding. Moreover, upon review of the record we are satisfied that the court adequately stated the reasons for its disposition.

Weiss, P.J., Mercure, Cardona and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Zachary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 24, 1993
198 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Matter of Zachary

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of ZACHARY I., Alleged to be a Person in Need of…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Nov 24, 1993

Citations

198 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
604 N.Y.S.2d 628

Citing Cases

Matter of Tabitha

Respondent's contentions, that Family Court's failure to inquire whether she wished to remain silent, to…

Matter of Mark "J"

On that day respondent, accompanied by his mother and Law Guardian and prior to making admissions, was…