IN RE GEORGE

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Respondent appeals from an order adjudicating him to be a juvenile delinquent based on the finding that he committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal mischief in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 145.00). "Respondent failed to preserve for our review his contention that [Family Court] improperly acted as an advocate for [petitioner] by questioning a witness" ( Matter of Aron B., 46 AD3d 1431, 1431; see People v Charleston, 56 NY2d 886, 887-888; Matter of Yadiel Roque C., 17 AD3d 1168, 1169), as well as his contention that the court erred in failing to order a probation investigation as required under Family Court Act § 351.1 (2) ( see generally Matter of Michael A.M., 31 AD3d 1183; Matter of Phillip D., 27 AD3d 1126). We decline to review those contentions in the interest of justice ( see generally Yadiel Roque C., 17 AD3d at 1169). Contrary to respondent's further contention, "the record establishes that, viewed in the totality of the proceedings, [respondent] received meaningful representation by his Law Guardian" ( Matter of Jeffrey V., 82 NY2d 121, 126; see Matter of Brian S.M., 309 AD2d 1224).