In re Madeline D.

149 A.D.3d 932

55 N.Y.S.3d 250

In the Matter of MADELINE D. (Anonymous), appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

April 19, 2017.

Geanine Towers, P.C., Brooklyn, NY, for appellant.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York, NY (Devin Slack and Melanie T. West of counsel; Erika Tang on the brief), for respondent.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., SANDRA L. SGROI, HECTOR D. LaSALLE, and FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.

Appeal from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Terrence J. McElrath, J.), dated December 7, 2015. The order adjudicated Madeline D. a juvenile delinquent and placed her in the custody of the New York City Administration for Children's Services for a period of 12 months. The appeal brings up for review an order of fact-finding of that court dated October 2, 2015, which, after a hearing, found that Madeline D. committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of unauthorized use of a vehicle in the third degree and false personation.

ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the appellant in the custody of the New York City Administration for Children's Services for a period of 12 months is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.

The appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the appellant in the custody of the New York City Administration for Children's Services (hereinafter ACS) for a period of 12 months has been rendered academic, as the period of placement has expired (see Matter of Jayson P., 144 A.D.3d 1161, 1161–1162, 42 N.Y.S.3d 313 ; Matter of Kieron C., 140 A.D.3d 1160, 1161, 34 N.Y.S.3d 174 ). However, because there may be collateral consequences resulting from the adjudication of delinquency, the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as adjudicated the appellant a juvenile delinquent, which brings up for review the order of fact-finding, has not been rendered academic (see Matter of Jayson P., 144 A.D.3d at 1162, 42 N.Y.S.3d 313 ; Matter of Kobe S., 122 A.D.3d 750, 751, 995 N.Y.S.2d 730 ).

In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see Matter of Stanley F., 76 A.D.3d 1067, 907 N.Y.S.2d 882 ), we nevertheless accord great deference to the opportunity of the trier of fact to view the witnesses, hear the...