Matter of Garcia v Administration for Children's Servs.
Annotate this CaseDecided on December 11, 2013
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P.
RUTH C. BALKIN
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL
SANDRA L. SGROI, JJ.
2012-03990
(Docket No. V-6056-12)
[*1]In the Matter of Jose Garcia, appellant,
v
Administration for Children's Services, respondent.
Carol Kahn, New York, N.Y., for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y.
(Edward F. X. Hart and Drake A.
Colley of counsel), for respondent.
DECISION & ORDER
In a visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the father appeals from an order of the Family Court, Kings County (Yuskevich, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated February 29, 2012, which dismissed that branch of his petition which sought visitation with the child Jennifer for lack of standing. The father's assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with Anders v California (386 US 738), in which she moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the father's assigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738), and we have also reviewed the father's pro se supplemental brief. Upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on the appeal. Counsel's application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see Anders v California, 386 US 738; Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.], 89 AD3d 252).
SKELOS, J.P., BALKIN, LEVENTHAL and SGROI, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
