Matter of Jane Aubrey P. (Cynthia R.)

Matter of Matter of Jane Aubrey P. (Cynthia R.) 2012 NY Slip Op 02604 Decided on April 10, 2012 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on April 10, 2012
Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, Freedman, Richter, JJ. 7319-
7320

[*1]In re Jane Aubrey P., A Dependent Child Under the Age of Eighteen Years, etc.,

and

Cynthia R., Respondent-Appellant, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Respondent.




Kenneth M. Tuccillo, Hastings on Hudson, for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Julie
Steiner of counsel), for respondent.
Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Claire
V. Merkine of counsel), attorney for the child.

Order, Family Court, New York County (Susan K. Knipps, J.), entered on or about April 21, 2008, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, following a fact-finding hearing, determined that respondent mother neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The finding of neglect was supported by a preponderance of the evidence (see Family Court Act § 1012[f]; § 1046[b]; Nicholson v Scoppetta, 3 NY3d 357, 368-369 [2004]). The record shows, inter alia, that the mother was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and engaged in conduct which raised serious questions about her ability to care for the child. The mother was observed acting in an inappropriate manner at the hospital during and after the birth of her child, and in the bathroom of the facility that hosted the parenting skills class she attended four months later.

The record does not support the mother's claim that she was improperly denied assigned counsel. The mother repeatedly failed to complete the financial disclosure form and gave varying accounts of her ability to hire counsel. When she finally stated that she earned only $1,000 per month, the court found that she was indigent and provided assigned counsel. [*2]Moreover, the mother was represented by counsel when the fact-finding hearing commenced.

We have considered the mother's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: APRIL 10, 2012

CLERK