From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People ex Rel. Margolis v. Dunston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 20, 1991
174 A.D.2d 516 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

June 20, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas E. McKeon, J.).


Initially, in the circumstances herein, we reject appellant's argument that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus was improperly commenced, as direct appeal is available. Although Family Court Act § 365.1 (1) grants to relator the general right of direct appeal from an order of disposition under Family Court Act article 3, it is long recognized that departure from traditional appeal proceedings and institution of habeas corpus proceedings, is permitted when dictated by reason of practicality and necessity in cases (such as this) where an individual stands uncharged of any crime and alleges illegal restraint of his liberty within the State (see, e.g., People ex rel. Keitt v McMann, 18 N.Y.2d 257).

Turning to the merits of relator's application, it is clear that the IAS court properly granted the writ of habeas corpus and directed relator's immediate release, on the ground that the Family Court's three successive temporary extensions of the placement of relator with the Division for Youth, totaling 45 days beyond expiration of the then-current placement period, violated the express terms of Family Court Act § 355.3 (5). The unambiguous provisions of Family Court Act § 355.3 mandate the expiration of a placement, and thus the termination of Family Court jurisdiction, at the end of a valid placement term, unless an extension thereof is timely petitioned and granted after appropriate court hearing. Such determination must be made either before expiration of the then-current placement term, or within a non-renewable temporary extension of placement of up to 30 days, ordered upon good cause shown (see, Besharov, Supp Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 29A, 1991 Pocket Part, Family Ct Act § 355.3; see also, Matter of Salvatore A., 154 A.D.2d 930). Here, as the required hearing and determination were not accomplished within the statutory time period, Family Court lacked jurisdiction to order an extension of relator's placement, and the writ of habeas corpus was properly granted.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Smith and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

People ex Rel. Margolis v. Dunston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 20, 1991
174 A.D.2d 516 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People ex Rel. Margolis v. Dunston

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ex rel. ALISA R. MARGOLIS, as Law…

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

Date published: Jun 20, 1991

Citations

174 A.D.2d 516 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Citing Cases

Matter of Wayne

Once the original placement expires, the Family Court loses jurisdiction over the juvenile unless an…

Matter of Heriberto

Family Court Act § 355.3 (1) requires that a petition to extend placement be filed at least sixty days prior…