Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: VICTOR S., etc., Petitioner–Respondent, v. KAREEM J.S., Respondent–Appellant.
Appeal from order, Family Court, New York County (Carol J. Goldstein, Referee), entered on or about January 23, 2012, which after a hearing, determined that appellant had committed acts that constituted aggravated harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.30), and granted petitioner a one-year order of protection directing appellant to, inter alia, stay away from and cease communication with him and his daughter, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot.
Because the order of protection has expired, this appeal is moot (see Matter of Diallo v. Diallo, 68 A.D.3d 411, 888 N.Y.S.2d 744 [1st Dept 2009], lv dismissed 14 N.Y.3d 854 [2010] ).
Were we to reach the merits, we would find that a fair preponderance of the evidence (Family Ct Act § 832), supports the referee's finding that appellant committed acts constituting the family offense of aggravated harassment in the second degree (see Penal Law § 240.30), warranting the issuance of an order of protection (see Family Ct Act § 812[1] ). Indeed, “making a telephone call will constitute aggravated harassment in the second degree when it is made with intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm another person and is made either in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm or with no purpose of legitimate communication” (Matter of Wendy Q. v. Jason Q., 94 A.D.3d 1371, 1373, 943 N.Y.S.2d 255 [3d Dept 2012] [internal quotation marks omitted] ). Contrary to appellant' contention, his intent to alarm or annoy petitioner was inferable from his statements about petitioner's daughter, because they constituted a threat that specifically referred to placing the safety of the child in jeopardy (see People v. Wilson, 59 A.D.3d 153, 154, 872 N.Y.S.2d 124 [1st Dept 2009], affd 14 N.Y.3d 895 [2010] ).
Appellant set forth no basis to disturb the court's credibility determinations (see Matter of F.B. v. W.B., 248 A.D.2d 119, 669 N.Y.S.2d 551 [1st Dept 1998] ).
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 05, 2013
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)