In re Anizabel B.

Appellant’s challenges to the court’s suppression ruling are substantially similar to arguments this Court rejected on two companion appeals (Matter of Michael R., 87 AD3d 940 [2011]; Matter of Daniel E., 82 AD3d 639 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 704 [2011]), and there is no reason to reach a different result here. Concur — Tom, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Richter and ManzanetDaniels, JJ.