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: Jelitza Benavides FERNANDEZ, petitioner-appellant, v. Jose Antonio Baca OTERO, respondent; Jayce T.B.B. (Anonymous), nonparty-appellant.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the mother and the subject child separately appeal from an order of the Family Court, Westchester County (Michelle I. Schauer, J.), dated April 24, 2023. The order, after a hearing, denied the mother's motion for the issuance of an order, inter alia, making specific findings so as to enable the subject child to petition the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services for special immigrant juvenile status pursuant to 8 USC § 1101(a)(27)(J).
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
In December 2022, the mother commenced this proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, seeking sole custody of the subject child. Thereafter, the mother moved for the issuance of an order, inter alia, making specific findings so as to enable the child to petition the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services for special immigrant juvenile status (hereinafter SIJS) pursuant to 8 USC § 1101(a)(27)(J). After a hearing, in an order dated March 16, 2023, the Family Court awarded the mother sole custody of the child, and in an order dated April 24, 2023, the court denied the mother's motion for the issuance of an order, inter alia, making specific findings so as to enable the child to petition for SIJS. The mother and the child separately appeal from the order dated April 24, 2023.
Contrary to the conclusion of the Family Court, the mother established that Peru, not Canada, was the child's previous country of nationality or the country of last habitual residence where the child's birth was registered (see Matter of Briceyda M.A.X. [Hugo R.A.O.], 190 AD3d 752, 754). It is undisputed that the child is under the age of 21 years, unmarried, and legally committed to an individual appointed by the court. However, under the circumstances of this case, the mother failed to submit sufficient evidence that the father abandoned the child. Accordingly, the court properly denied the mother's motion for the issuance of an order, inter alia, making specific findings so as to enable the child to petition for SIJS.
DILLON, J.P., BARROS, DOWLING and WAN, JJ., concur.
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: 2023–04080
Decided: June 12, 2024
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
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)