Opinion
2017–07269 Docket No. O–410–17
07-05-2018
In the Matter of Sonia THAXTON, respondent, v. Luis CHAPMAN, appellant.
John F.X. Burke, Goshen, NY, for appellant. Karen M. Jansen, White Plains, NY, attorney for the child.
John F.X. Burke, Goshen, NY, for appellant.
Karen M. Jansen, White Plains, NY, attorney for the child.
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Orange County (Victoria B. Campbell, J.), entered June 5, 2017. The order, after a fact-finding hearing, and upon a finding that the father committed a family offense within the meaning of Family Court Act § 812, granted the mother's petition and directed the father, for a period not to exceed two years, to observe the conditions of behavior specified in an order of protection entered April 14, 2017.
ORDERED that the order entered June 5, 2017, 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" ( Matter of Cassie v. Cassie, 109 A.D.3d 337, 340, 969 N.Y.S.2d 537, quoting Family Ct Act § 832 ; see Matter of Frimer v. Frimer, 143 A.D.3d 895, 896, 39 N.Y.S.3d 226 ; Matter of Bah v. Bah, 112 A.D.3d 921, 978 N.Y.S.2d 301 ). "The determination of whether a family offense was committed is a factual issue to be resolved by the Family Court, and its determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses are entitled to great weight on appeal, such that they will not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record" ( Matter of Porter v. Moore, 149 A.D.3d 1082, 1083, 53 N.Y.S.3d 174 ; see Matter of Henderson v. Henderson, 137 A.D.3d 911, 912, 27 N.Y.S.3d 183 ; Matter of Abatantuno v. Abatantuno, 119 A.D.3d 779, 989 N.Y.S.2d 331 ; Matter of Creighton v. Whitmore, 71 A.D.3d 1141, 898 N.Y.S.2d 585 ).
Contrary to the appellant's contention, a fair preponderance of the credible evidence supports the Family Court's determination that he committed the family offense of harassment in the second degree, warranting the issuance of an order of protection (see Family Ct Act §§ 812[1] ; 832, 841[d]; cf. Penal Law § 240.26[2] ).
MASTRO, J.P., ROMAN, DUFFY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.