IN RE: DAVONA L. (2007)

 Respondent father contends that Family Court erred in revoking a suspended judgment entered upon his consent to a finding of permanent neglect and in terminating his parental rights.   We affirm. “Family Court Act §§ 631 and 633 allow a court to suspend judgment for up to one year, providing a brief grace period designed to prepare a parent, previously found to have permanently neglected his or her child, to be reunited with the child” (Matter of Nikkias T., 32 A.D.3d 1220, 1221, 821 N.Y.S.2d 714, lv. denied 7 N.Y.3d 716, 826 N.Y.S.2d 181, 859 N.E.2d 921;  see Matter of Michael B., 80 N.Y.2d 299, 310-311, 590 N.Y.S.2d 60, 604 N.E.2d 122).   Here, petitioner established by the requisite preponderance of the evidence that the father failed to comply with the terms and conditions set forth in the suspended judgment, and thus the court properly revoked the suspended judgment and terminated the father's parental rights (see Nikkias T., 32 A.D.3d 1220, 821 N.Y.S.2d 714;  see Matter of Terry L.G., 6 A.D.3d 1144, 776 N.Y.S.2d 429).   We note that, while the Law Guardian should have informed the court of the child's wishes pursuant to the Guidelines for Law Guardians in the Fourth Department, the Law Guardian's failure to do so did not prevent the court from considering the child's best interests (cf. Matter of Dominique A.W., 17 A.D.3d 1038, 1039-1040, 794 N.Y.S.2d 195, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 706, 801 N.Y.S.2d 799, 835 N.E.2d 659).

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

MEMORANDUM: