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: MINDY S. GIRARD, PETITIONER–RESPONDENT, v. WILLIAM R. NEVILLE, RESPONDENT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the matter is remitted to Family Court, Oswego County, for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: Respondent appeals from an order confirming the determination of the Support Magistrate that he willfully violated an order of child support and sentencing him to three years of probation. Although the Support Magistrate properly advised respondent that he had the right to counsel (see Family Ct Act § 262 [a][vi] ), we agree with respondent that the Support Magistrate failed to make a “ ‘searching inquiry’ “ to ensure that his waiver of the right to counsel was a knowing, voluntary and intelligent choice, and thus that he was denied his right to counsel (Matter of Storelli v. Storelli, 101 AD3d 1787, 1788; see Matter of Commissioner of Genesee County Dept. of Social Servs. v Jones, 87 AD3d 1275, 1275–1276). We therefore reverse the order and remit the matter to Family Court for a new hearing. To the extent that our decision in Matter of Huard v. Lugo (81 AD3d 1265, 1266, lv denied 16 NY3d 710) requires preservation of a contention that the Support Magistrate erred in allowing the respondent to proceed pro se at a fact-finding hearing, that decision is no longer to be followed. In light of our determination, we do not review respondent's remaining contentions.
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
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 15–00153
Decided: March 18, 2016
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)