MATTER OF MALINDA

Ordered that the dispositional orders are affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Absent a legal disqualification pursuant to Judiciary Law § 14; a Trial Judge is the sole arbiter of recusal (see, People v Moreno, 70 N.Y.2d 403; Matter of Johnson v Hornblass, 93 A.D.2d 732). Here, the appellant failed to demonstrate that the court's ultimate decisions were based upon any bias. Therefore the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in failing to recuse itself from the case.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in requiring the appellant to enter a sex offenders program (see, Matter of Abby Gail E., 191 A.D.2d 696) nor in requiring him to enter therapy before he could have any form of visitation with his children (see, Matter of Esther CC., 194 A.D.2d 949, 951; Matter of Nassau County Dept. of Social Servs. [Kimberly S.], 173 A.D.2d 830).

The appellant's remaining contentions are either not properly before this Court or without merit. O'Brien, J.P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.