Donald R., who was born on May 5, 1988, has moved for an order sealing the record of

this juvenile delinquency proceeding which was filed against him on August 22, 2003 when he

was 15 years old.

The juvenile delinquency petition filed against Donald R. alleged that on two dates in

June of 2003 he and two adult accomplices burglarized the apartment in which the former

girlfriend of one of the adult perpetrators resided. The petition charged respondent with

committing acts which, were he then an adult, would constitute the crimes of Burglary in the

Second Degree, Attempted Burglary in the Second Degree, Criminal Possession of Stolen

Property in the Third and Fifth Degrees, Criminal Mischief in the Fourth Degree and Criminal

Trespass in the Second Degree.

On October 8, 2003, respondent entered an admission to having committed an act which [*2]

would constitute the crime of Attempted Burglary in the Second Degree, a class D felony (P.L.

§110.00/140.25 [2]), and the remaining counts of the petition were dismissed (Fam. Ct. Act

§321.2 [3]). A dispositional hearing was commenced on November 20, 2003 at which the Court

received a report of an investigation conducted by the Department of Probation which

recommended that respondent be placed under a period of probation supervision by the

Department. At the conclusion of the hearing on December 3, 2003, the Court adjudicated the

respondent to be a juvenile delinquent (Fam. Ct. Act §352.1 [1]), and pursuant to Family Court

Act §§352.2 (1) (b) and 353.2, Donald was placed under the supervision of the Department of

Probation for a period of 18 months under specific conditions which included: (i) the

performance of 25 hours of community service; (ii) cooperation with all referrals for counseling

and services made by probation; (iii) counseling to address educational concerns; (iv) regular

school attendance and compliance with school rules and regulations; and (v) the commission of

no further criminal or delinquent acts by respondent. Respondent was further directed to comply

with a final order of protection issued in favor of two of the victims of the burglary, and his Law

Guardian was given leave to move to reopen the dispositional hearing upon proof of12 months of

compliance with the conditions of the order of probation (see, Fam. Ct. Act §355.1).

In support of the motion to seal the record, respondent, through his attorney, alleges in

pertinent part, that:

Mr. R. has completed all of his conditions of probation successfully and

received a letter of recommendation from his Probation Officer.

Mr. R. joined the United States Army in 2006 and has excelled as a

member of the Armed Forces for the last four years. In 2009, he transferred

to the United States Air Force. [*3]

Mr. R. is also finishing his Bachelor's Degree at St. John's University

and will be graduating in May 2010. It is Mr. R.s' intention to join the

ranks of law enforcement and his delinquency finding may prevent him from

furthering himself.

Appended to the motion are a letter from Probation Officer Edna J. White of the New

York City Department of Probation and a Memorandum from Staff Sergeant "John" Torres of

the Army National Guard.

The letter from Probation Officer White, which is dated July 28, 2009, states in pertinent

part, that:

Please be advised that [Donald R.] was placed on probation as a Juvenile Delinquent in Queens Family Court for 18 months on 12-3-03. While on probation, he reported to the undersigned two times per month. Mr. R. was mandated to complete 25 hours of community service. He was assigned at

YMCA in Jamaica to complete the hours. He actually completed 100 hours.

Mr. R.s' duties were to do home work help with the children under the age

of 10 years old. While Mr. R. Was on probation he completed the 11th grade.

After he completed his probation he was able to graduate from Richmond

Hill High School.

Mr. R.'s adjustment to probation was very positive and he always

demonstrated a respectful and positive attitude. As a Probation Officer,

I'm proud of Mr. R. for the accomplishments he has gained.

According to documentation prepared by the New York Army National Guard, Donald

R. holds the rank of Specialist, and he has been assigned to the 642nd Aviation Support Battalion

since 2005. A memorandum from Sergeant Torres of the Army National Guard, which is dated

December 5, 2009, reads as follows:

I have known Mr. R. for over 4 years, since he was a teenager and I'm

proud to see the man he has become. In addition to being his recruiter in the

Army, we have remained close friends. Even though we are friends, he still

addressed me in a very professional manner in accord[ance] with Army

regulation. He never forgets his military manners. Mr. R. also worked with

me as my recruiter assistant on a seasonal period from 2007 to 2009. His [*4]

work consist[ed] of both administrative duties and recruiting details. He is

very pro-active and responsible. He does all his work with the upmost

professionalism without and complain[ts]. He received the NY recruiting

Medal for his excellent performance.

Mr. R. has also been attending college and I'm proud of the fact that he

is close to receiving his bachelor degree. He is very intelligent and approached

everything with care, to make sure he can accomplish it in a timely manner.

From knowing Mr. R. for so long, he never demonstrated any negative

characteristic[s]. He ha[s] always had a positive attitude about everything. He

never got any disciplinary action against him during his Army career. It's

such a bad day for the Army to have him leave and go to the Air Force. We

need more soldiers with his personal courage and selfless service. But I know

he will excel in the Air Force as he did in the Army. For such a young man,

Mr. R. is very mature beyond his years. He will become a very productive member of any organization he chooses to be involve[d] in. As a Staff Sergeant in the U.S. Army, I personally recommend Mr. R. for any opportunities he chooses to be a part of.

Respondent's application is governed by Family Court Act §375.2, which reads as

follows:

1. If an action has resulted in a finding of delinquency pursuant to subdivision one of section 352.1, other than a finding that the respondent committed a

designated felony act, the court may, in the interest of justice and upon motion

of the respondent, order the sealing of appropriate records pursuant to subdivision

one of section 375.1.

2. Such motion must be in writing and may be filed at any time subsequent to

the entering of such finding. Notice of such motion shall be served upon the

presentment agency not less than eight days prior to the return date of the

motion. Answering affidavits shall be served at least two days before such

time.

3. The Court shall state on the record its reasons for granting or denying the

motion.

4. If such motion is denied, it may not be renewed for a period of one year,

unless the order of denial permits renewal at an earlier time.

5. The court shall not order sealing of any record except as prescribed by this [*5]

section or section 375.1.^[FN1]

6. Such a motion cannot be filed until the respondent's sixteenth birthday.

Both Family Court Act §375.2 and the related provisions of Family Court Act §375.1

are intended to prevent a person alleged to be a juvenile delinquent or a person adjudicated to

be a juvenile delinquent from future prejudice which may be caused by private persons or public

agencies have access to records relating to a juvenile delinquency proceeding. Accordingly,

whether the records are automatically sealed in accordance with Family Court Act §375.1, or the

records are sealed subsequent to a juvenile delinquency adjudication in accordance with Family

Court Act §375.2, the statute strictly limits the circumstances under which an individual or public

agency may gain access to such records (Matter of Alonzo M. v. New York City Department of

Probation, 72 NY2d 662, 667-668 [1988]).

Family Court Act §375.2 specifically authorizes the Family Court to order the sealing of

all court, Department of Probation, Presentment Agency and Police Department records relating

to the a juvenile delinquency proceeding in which the respondent was adjudicated to be a

juvenile delinquent (see, Fam. Ct. Act §375.1 [1]), unless the adjudication is based upon a

finding that the juvenile committed a designated felony act (see, Fam. Ct. Act §301.2 [8])

(Sobie, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 29A, Family Court Act

§375.2 at 483 [2008]). A motion to seal records after a finding of juvenile delinquency may be

made once a respondent reaches the age of 16. [*6]

The Court may grant the motion if it is determined that sealing of the record is in the

interest of justice (e.g., Matter of Carlton B., 268 AD2d 368, 369 [2000]; Matter of Rosa R., 68

AD3d 407 [2009]). While the language "in the interest of justice" is not defined by the statute,

it is a phrase often encountered in the context of criminal procedure. An application based upon

the "interest of justice" is addressed to the discretion of a court and it relates to "the totality of all

the circumstances in the particular case" (People v. Tyler, 46 NY2d 264, 266-267 [1978]

[internal citation omitted]). Where a court is asked to exercise its discretion and to act "in the

interest of justice", the court is not vested with "an untrammeled right to act on purely subjective

considerations" (People v. Rickert, 58 NY2d 122, 126 [1983]), but instead, the court must engage

in "a sensitive balancing of the interests of the individual and of the People" (Id. at 127), so that

"a proper result is reached" (People v. Cornish, 43 AD2d 103, 104 [1973]).

Having considered the pertinent factors in this case, which include the nature of the

conduct which led to the juvenile delinquency adjudication, the impact which respondent's

actions had upon the victim,^[FN2] respondent's compliance with the conditions imposed by the

Court and his successful completion of his period of probation as attested to by his former

Probation Officer, and his post-probation activities, the Court concludes that the interest of

justice compels that the motion to seal the record be granted.

The goal of the juvenile justice system is to provide rehabilitation and treatment to [*7]

delinquent young people so that they may lead productive and law-abiding adult lives (see,

Matter of Quinton A., 49 NY2d 328, 334-335 [1980]; Matter of Carmelo E., 57 NY2d 431,

435 [1982]; Green v. Montgomery, 95 NY2d 693, 697-698 [2001]; Sebastian v. State of New

York, 250 AD2d 260, 262 [1998], aff'd 93 NY2d 790 [1999]). The probation supervision

imposed by this Court in December of 2003 furthered the underlying goal in that it was

specifically designed to rehabilitate the respondent by providing him with appropriate services

and treatment without the necessity of removing him from the community (see, People v.

Letterlough, 86 NY2d 259, 264 [2006]; Matter of Brandon W., 28 AD3d 783, 785 [2006], lv.

denied 7 NY3d 707 [2006]; Matter of Ashley D., 55 AD3d 605, 606 [2008]).

Mr. R. successfully completed the period of probation by fulfilling all of the specific

conditions imposed by the Court and there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Mr. R.

has had any contact with the juvenile or adult criminal justice systems after being placed on

probation in December of 2003. Subsequent to having been placed on probation, Mr. R.

successfully completed High School, and he enrolled in college at St. John's University from

which he will soon receive his Bachelor of Arts degree. Additionally, Mr. R. enlisted in the Army

National Guard in 2006, where he achieved promotion to the rank of Specialist. Mr. R. has left

the Army and he is presently a member of the United States Air Force. There is no indication

that Mr. R.'s military service has been anything less than honorable at all times. Mr. R.

indicates that he wishes to pursue a career in law enforcement and he should be permitted to

pursue that objective without any possible stigmatizing effects caused by this juvenile

delinquency adjudication. The Court further observes that the underlying incident occurred when

Mr. R. was 15 years old and that it did not involve the use of force against another person [*8]

(cf., Matter of Carlton B. at 369 [underlying adjudication based upon assault]; Matter of Rosa R.

at 407 [same]).

Therefore, considering the circumstances as a whole, the Court finds that Mr. R. has been

rehabilitated, he is a law-abiding and productive young man, and that the interest of justice

preponderates in favor of granting the motion to seal the records so that he not suffer any negative collateral consequences as a result of his having been adjudicated a juvenile delinquent

in 2003.

It is therefore,

ORDERED, that the motion is granted for the reasons set forth herein and that the

Clerk shall send the notices to the appropriate agencies and persons as required by Family

Court Act §375.1 (1).

This constitutes the decision and order of the Court.

E N T E R:

________________________________

JOHN M. HUNT

Judge of the Family Court

Dated: Jamaica, New York

March 19, 2010