DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.
The appellant argues that the Family Court improvidently exercised its discretion in placing him in the custody of the New York State Office of Children and Family Services for a period not to exceed 12 months because it was not the least restrictive available alternative ( see Family Ct Act § 352.2). However, that argument has been rendered academic by the expiration of the 12-month period of placement ( see Matter of Shamasia M., A.D.3d [2d Dept, Feb. 2, 2004]; Matter of Adonnica L., 1 A.D.3d 599, 600). In any event, the argument is without merit. The Family Court's determination demonstrated that it carefully considered less restrictive alternatives to placement and balanced the needs of the appellant with the need for the protection of the community ( see Family Ct Act § 352.2; Matter of Shea K., 308 A.D.2d 586; Matter of Akeem F., 301 A.D.2d 650; Matter of Tristan W., 258 A.D.2d 585).
RITTER, J.P., S. MILLER, LUCIANO and TOWNES, JJ., concur.