DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Although the order of protection in favor of Charlene J. R., Devonte M., and George W. has expired, "in light of the enduring consequences which may potentially flow from an adjudication that a party has committed a family offense * * * this appeal is not academic" ( Matter of Cutrone v. Cutrone, 225 A.D.2d 767, 768; see Matter of Bickwid v. Deutsch, 87 N.Y.2d 862, 863; Matter of Grossman v. Grossman, 238 A.D.2d 339).
Contrary to the appellant's contention, the record supports the Family Court's determination that, based on a preponderance of the credible evidence, the appellant committed a family offense, warranting the issuance of the orders of protection ( see Family Ct Act § 812, 832; Matter of Dabbene v. Dabbene, 297 A.D.2d 812; Matter of Hogan v. Hogan, 271 A.D.2d 533). Further, the record reveals the existence of aggravating circumstances which justified the Family Court's three-year order of protection with respect to Charlene J. R., and the children Tiana R. and Tabitha R. The appellant exhibited violent and harassing behavior either in the presence of Charlene J. R., alone, or while the children were present, which constituted an immediate and ongoing danger to them ( see Family Ct Act § 827[a], [ii], § 842; Matter of Reilly v. Reilly, 254 A.D.2d 361, 362).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.
SMITH, J.P., KRAUSMAN, LUCIANO and CRANE, JJ., concur.