Opinion
October 14, 1997
Appeal from the Family Court, Kings County (Segal, J.),
Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the appellant's contention, the Family Court did not err in finding that he had violated the order of protection by committing harassing acts against his wife ( see, Family Ct Act § 846-a). As the trier of fact, the Family Court's determination regarding the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight, and will not be disturbed where, as here, it is supported by the record ( see, Matter of Irene O., 38 N.Y.2d 776; Matter of Tibichrani v. Debs, 230 A.D.2d 746).
In view of the appellant's lack of diligence in securing documentary evidence and the attendance of witnesses, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying his belated request for a continuance ( see, Matter of Anthony M., 63 N.Y.2d 270; People v. Foy, 32 N.Y.2d 473). In addition, the record demonstrates that the appellant's attorney afforded him meaningful representation during the hearing ( see, People v Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137; Matter of Kazmi v. Kazmi, 201 A.D.2d 857).
Finally, it was not an improvident exercise of discretion for the court to sentence the appellant to consecutive terms of incarceration for violating the order of protection on three separate occasions ( see, Family Ct Act § 846-a; Matter of Walker v. Walker, 86 N.Y.2d 624).
Rosenblatt, J.P., Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.