ENCOURAGED KID TO NOT COOPERATE WITH TRANSPORT TEAM
After she was found in contempt of court and sentenced to a 30-day period of incarceration, AA appealed to the Appellate Division, Second Department.
On its review, the AD2 noted that, after a psychological examination of the couple's then 15-year-old child, the Nassau County Supreme Court granted the father’s motion to have the youngster placed with a therapeutic boarding school located up in Maine.
When the judge was later informed that the child refused to go with the transport team, a hearing was conducted, and testimony revealed that AA “discouraged the child from cooperating.”
Since the evidence was legally sufficient -- “beyond a reasonable doubt" -- that AA had willfully disobeyed the Supreme Court’s mandate, the AD2 thought that she had been “properly adjudged” to be in “criminal contempt.” Interestingly, it thought the 30-day sentence was “excessive,” and reduced it to time served, and sent the matter back for a determination as to an “appropriate fine."
Think she was fine with that?
# # #
DECISION