Carmellita I., Respondent-Appellant. v. << (2005)

 Respondent mother appeals from an order that revoked a suspended judgment and terminated her parental rights with respect to her child based upon her violation of the condition therein that she prohibit the child's father from having any contact with the child or “be[ing] in the same place as the child.”   The suspended judgment had been entered upon respondent's consent to an adjudication of permanent neglect, and the condition therein was included based on the fact that the child's father previously had severely beaten the child.   Petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent allowed the child's father to see the child and thus violated that condition of the suspended judgment (see Matter of Craig L., 2 A.D.3d 1461, 1462, 769 N.Y.S.2d 770).   Contrary to respondent's contention, Family Court did not err in allowing hearsay testimony concerning respondent's violation of that condition of the consent order (see Matter of Veronica W., 289 A.D.2d 1055, 1056, 735 N.Y.S.2d 848, lv. denied 97 N.Y.2d 613, 742 N.Y.S.2d 605, 769 N.E.2d 352) and, in any event, the court gave little weight to that testimony in concluding that respondent violated that condition.   The evidence supports the further determination of the court that termination of respondent's parental rights is in the child's best interests (see Craig L., 2 A.D.3d at 1462, 769 N.Y.S.2d 770).

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

MEMORANDUM: