Matter of William Vv.

• Decision Date: 12 July 2007
• Docket Number: 501668.
• Citation: 2007 NY Slip Op 05994,42 A.D.3d 710,839 N.Y.S.2d 614
• Parties: In the Matter of WILLIAM VV., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent. MICHELE CLARK, as Columbia County Probation Officer, Respondent; WILLIAM VV., Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

42 A.D.3d 710

839 N.Y.S.2d 614

2007 NY Slip Op 05994

In the Matter of WILLIAM VV., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent MICHELE CLARK, as Columbia County Probation Officer, Respondent WILLIAM VV., Appellant.

501668.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Third Department.

Decided July 12, 2007.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court of Columbia County (Czajka, J.), entered September 5, 2006, which granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Ct Act article 3, to find respondent in violation of a prior order of probation.

CARDONA, P.J.

In December 2005, respondent was adjudicated a juvenile delinquent and placed on probation for 12 months. Pursuant to the order of disposition, respondent was subject to various conditions, including that he abstain from the use of illegal drugs and submit to recognized testing to determine their use. Thereafter, a petition was filed alleging that respondent violated the order of probation by smoking marihuana and twice refusing to submit to the required urine drug screen. Respondent subsequently appeared before Family Court and completed an admission statement which was also signed by his parents and Law Guardian. Following a query, Family Court found that respondent had violated the terms of his probation. A dispositional hearing was held, wherein respondent appeared with his parents and Law Guardian. Family Court placed respondent with the Department of Social Services for one year inasmuch as respondent, "while on probation, has continued to be physically and verbally aggressive towards others and continues to use illegal drugs."

Initially, we do not agree that respondent's admission was insufficient based upon his claim that Family Court did not follow certain requirements set forth in Family Ct Act § 321.3, including making the proper allocution of his parents. Notably, prior to accepting an admission of a violation of probation in the context of a juvenile delinquency proceeding, "`[Family C]ourt shall ... ascertain through allocution of the respondent and his parent or other person legally responsible for his care, if present, that (a) he committed the act or acts to which he is entering an admission, (b) he is voluntarily waiving his right to a fact-finding hearing, and (c) he is aware of the possible specific dispositional orders'" (Matter of Theodore N., 1 AD3d 828, 828-829 [2003], quoting Family Ct Act § 321.3 [1]; see Matter of John II., 31 AD3d 842, 842 [2006]; Matter of Donald NN., 9 AD3d 537, 537 [2004]).

Here, respondent, his parents and Law Guardian signed an admission statement that advised respondent of his rights to remain silent and to a fact-finding hearing and that, if the court determined that he violated his order of probation, respondent could be placed in a facility for up to 12 months. Further, the court asked...