From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Donna

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 10, 1987
132 A.D.2d 1004 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

July 10, 1987

Appeal from the Monroe County Family Court, Marks, J.

Present — Callahan, J.P., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: While every litigant has a fundamental right, guaranteed by the Due Process Clauses of both the Federal and State Constitutions, to be present at every stage of the trial (Matter of Cecilia R., 36 N.Y.2d 317; Matter of Ana Maria Q., 52 A.D.2d 607), this right is not absolute in civil actions (Matter of Raymond Dean L., 109 A.D.2d 87, 88). On this record, we conclude that a balancing of the respective interests of the parties justified Family Court's exercise of its statutory responsibility to protect the child by excluding respondent while the child testified (see, Family Ct Act § 1011). Moreover, respondent's counsel was permitted to be present while the child testified and he was also given the right to cross-examine her.

The court properly determined that the child was competent to testify under oath. The court's determination was supported by its preliminary examination of the child, as well as by the testimony of others whose information would shed light on capacity and intelligence (see, People v. Parks, 41 N.Y.2d 36, 46). Accordingly, there was no abuse of discretion.

In any event, the child's out-of-court statements were sufficiently corroborated by the testimony of the other witnesses (see, Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [vi]). As we recently observed, corroboration refers to the quantum of proof and the amount of corroboration required in a child protective proceeding is less than that applicable in a criminal proceeding (Matter of Ryan D., 125 A.D.2d 160). The opinion of the expert on "intra-familial child abuse syndrome" was admissible on the issue of whether the child had, in fact, been sexually abused and to corroborate the child's previous out-of-court statements (see, Matter of Ryan D., supra; Matter of Nicole V., 123 A.D.2d 97).

Respondent's argument that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel is without merit (see, People v Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146-147).


Summaries of

Matter of Donna

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 10, 1987
132 A.D.2d 1004 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Matter of Donna

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of DONNA K., a Child Alleged to be Abused

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jul 10, 1987

Citations

132 A.D.2d 1004 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Nakiah W. v. Latoya N.

In civil and child protective cases, the due process right to be present at every stage of a trial, and to…

In re Nakiah W.

Matter of Justin CC. , 77 AD3d 207 at 210 (3d Dept. 2010) (citingMatter of Lindsey BB. , 70 AD3d 1205, 1207…