IN THE MATTER OF ROSALIS D

ORDERED that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition, as, in effect, amended by the order dated February 28, 2003, which placed the appellant with the New York State Office of Children and Family Services until March 5, 2003, is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.

The appellant failed to preserve her challenge to the legal sufficiency of her admission for appellate review (see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665; Matter of Haile B., 252 A.D.2d 497; Matter of Gregory B., 242 A.D.2d 296). In any event, the admission was legally sufficient to establish that the appellant committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of menacing in the third degree (see Penal Law § 120.15). Contrary to the appellant's contention, the admission demonstrated that the complainant had a well-founded fear of serious physical injury (compare Matter of Michael H., 294 A.D.2d 364; see Matter of Steven W., 294 A.D.2d 370; Matter of Akida L., 170 A.D.2d 680).

The appellant's challenge to her placement with the New York State Office of Children and Family Services until March 5, 2003, is academic, since the placement period has expired (see Matter of Yuan Tung C., 296 A.D.2d 323; Matter of Anthony G., 247 A.D.2d 792; Matter of Christopher H., 198 A.D.2d 120).

The appellant's remaining contention has been rendered academic.

SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, McGINITY and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.