The courts finding that respondent had sexually abused his daughter was supported by a preponderance of the evidence, primarily the credited testimony of the infant victim ( Matter of Johnny 0., 240 A.D.2d 179). Moreover, the childs testimony was corroborated to a substantial degree by the testimony elicited during respondents case.
Before the child was "sworn" as a witness, the court sufficiently ascertained that the 6-year-old was capable of distinguishing between the truth and lies. The courts exclusion of respondent from the courtroom during his daughters testimony was appropriate under the circumstances since it was necessary to safeguard the childs well-being and did not function to deprive respondent of due process of law ( Matter of Donna K, 132 A.D.2d 1004). Respondents counsel, who was present during the childs testimony, was allowed to consult with respondent before conducting his cross-examination ( see, supra).
We have considered respondents remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J: P., Ellen, Williams, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.