IN RE: Yanetta S. MATHIS (2024)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, respondent appeals from an order of fact-finding and disposition in which Supreme Court, inter alia, determined that he committed acts constituting the family offense of harassment in the second degree against petitioner (Family Ct Act § 812 [1]; Penal Law § 240.26 [1]). Contrary to respondent's contention, we conclude that the court did not err in refusing to assign him counsel at the fact-finding hearing after he was no longer represented by retained counsel inasmuch as the record establishes that respondent “failed to fully and timely make the disclosure necessary to support his claim of indigency” (Matter of Moiseeva v. Sichkin, 129 A.D.3d 974, 975, 13 N.Y.S.3d 123 [2d Dept. 2015]; see Matter of Jane Aubrey P. [Cynthia R.], 94 A.D.3d 497, 497-498, 941 N.Y.S.2d 618 [1st Dept. 2012]; Matter of Iadicicco v. Iadicicco, 270 A.D.2d 721, 722-723, 704 N.Y.S.2d 377 [3d Dept. 2000]; see generally Carney v. Carney, 160 A.D.3d 218, 224-225, 73 N.Y.S.3d 694 [4th Dept. 2018]). Contrary to respondent's further contention, we conclude that petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent committed acts constituting harassment in the second degree (see Matter of Harvey v. Harvey, 214 A.D.3d 1462, 1462-1463, 184 N.Y.S.3d 666 [4th Dept. 2023]).