Matter of Alyssa G. (Miguel P.)

Matter of Matter of Alyssa G. (Miguel P.) 2012 NY Slip Op 02873 Decided on April 17, 2012 Appellate Division, Second 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 17, 2012
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, A.P.J.
L. PRISCILLA HALL
PLUMMER E. LOTT
SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.
2011-04482
2011-04483
2011-04484
(Docket Nos. N-26489-09, N-26490-09)

[*1]In the Matter of Alyssa G. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent;

and

Miguel P. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 1)



In the Matter of Emelie G. (Anonymous). Administration for Children's Services, respondent;

and

Miguel P. (Anonymous), appellant. (Proceeding No. 2) Salvatore C. Adamo, New York, N.Y., for appellant.




Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y.
(Mordecai Newman of counsel; Graham Morrison on the brief), for
respondent.
Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Tamara A. Steckler and
Patricia Colella of counsel), attorney for the
children.


DECISION & ORDER

In two related child protective proceedings pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, the father appeals (1), as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of fact-finding and disposition of the Family Court, Queens County (McGowan, J.), dated April 20, 2011, as, without an evidentiary dispositional hearing, released the subject children to the mother and directed him to complete a sex offender program, (2) from an order of protection of the same court, also dated April 20, 2011, which, inter alia, directed him to stay away from the child Alyssa G. for a period of one year, and (3) from an order of protection of the same court, also dated April 20, 2011, which, inter alia, directed him to stay away from the child Emelie G. until she reaches the age of 18.

ORDERED that the order of fact-finding and disposition is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

ORDERED that the orders of protection are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The father's contention that the Family Court erred in failing to conduct a full dispositional hearing is unpreserved for appellate review, as he did not object when the Family Court informed him that the matter would proceed to disposition, he did not request a full hearing, and he [*2]participated without objection in the informal dispositional proceeding conducted by that court (see Matter of Royce K., 64 AD3d 779, 780).

The father's remaining contentions are without merit.
MASTRO, A.P.J., HALL, LOTT and SGROI, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino

Clerk of the Court