Onondaga County Probation Department, Petitioner-Respondent. v. << (1999)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Matter of MATTHEW S., Respondent-Appellant. Onondaga County Probation Department, Petitioner-Respondent.

Decided: November 12, 1999

PRESENT: DENMAN, P.J., PINE, WISNER, PIGOTT, JR., and CALLAHAN, JJ.

Ron Ashkenasy, Fayetteville, for respondent-appellant. Maggie Seikaly, Syracuse, for petitioner-respondent.

Family Court properly determined after a hearing that exceptional circumstances required that respondent's probation be continued for an additional year (see, Family Ct. Act § 353.2[6] ). The Onondaga County Probation Department presented proof of respondent's recalcitrance and need for continued counseling, and, in the absence of an order continuing probation, the court lacked authority to order continued counseling. Although an order of disposition may be modified pursuant to Family Court Act § 355.1 upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances, any “new order of disposition under this section * * * expires * * * not later than the expiration date of the original order” (Family Ct. Act § 355.1[3] ). We have examined respondent's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.

Order unanimously affirmed without costs.

MEMORANDUM:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network