Gabriel S. v. Alphonso S.
Opinion of the Court
Respondent’s participation in the hearing via telephone did not deprive him of his due process rights (see Matter of Paul Antoine Devontae R. [Paul R.], 78 AD3d 610, 611 [1st Dept 2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 707 [2011]), and there is no reason to disturb the hearing court’s credibility determination (see Matter of Everett C. v Oneida P., 61 AD3d 489 [1st Dept 2009]). The court’s decision was appropriate given that respondent is incarcerated and did not request to be produced for the hearing. With regard to respondent’s Supreme Court application to modify the visitation stipulation to include in-person visitation with the parties’ children at the correctional facility where he is incarcerated, the court properly found that respondent failed to present any evidence that there has been a change in circumstances to warrant such a modification, or that in-person visitation is in the best interests of the children (see Matter of Santiago v Halbal, 88 AD3d 616, 617 [1st Dept 2011]).
We have considered respondent’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Saxe, Catterson, Acosta and Gische, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.