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: WENDY R. FISHER, PETITIONER–RESPONDENT, v. JUSTIN C. HOFERT, RESPONDENT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JEFFREY D. OSHLAG, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHILD, BATAVIA.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the petition is dismissed.
Memorandum: Respondent father appeals from an order of protection entered upon a finding that he committed the family offense of aggravated harassment in the second degree against petitioner mother (see Penal Law § 240.30[1][a]; see also Family Ct Act § 812[1] ). We note at the outset that the order of protection has expired but, “given the totality of the enduring legal and reputational consequences of the contested order of protection, respondent's appeal from that order is not moot” (Matter of Veronica P. v. Radcliff A., 24 NY3d 668, _).
The Court of Appeals has determined that Penal Law § 240.30(1), which proscribes communications made “in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm,” is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad (see People v. Golb, 23 NY3d 455, 467, rearg. denied 24 NY3d 932). Thus, the statute cannot serve as the basis for a finding that respondent committed a family offense (see generally Matter of Kakwani v Kakwani, 124 AD3d 658, 659; Matter of Lystra Fatimah N. v. Rafael M., 122 AD3d 499, 499). Inasmuch as Family Court concluded that petitioner failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent had committed either of two other family offenses alleged in the petition, we reverse the order and dismiss the petition.
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: CAF 13–00620
Decided: March 20, 2015
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
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)