In the Matter of Darnell C.

Decision Date13 October 2009
Docket Number(Docket No. D-900-08).,2008-06614.
PartiesIn the Matter of DARNELL C., Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the appellant in the custody of the Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 12 months is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, as the placement has expired pursuant to its terms (see Matter of Joseph R., 49 AD3d 651 [2008]); and it is further,

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

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see Matter of David H., 69 NY2d 792, 793 [1987]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and committed acts constituting the crime of possession of a weapon by a person under sixteen (see Penal Law § 265.03 [3]; § 265.02 [3]; § 265.05). Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see Matter of Hasan C., 59 AD3d 617 [2009]; Matter of Victor I., 57 AD3d 779 [2008]; cf. CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the trier of fact's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see Matter of Daniel R., 51 AD3d 933, 933-934 [2008]; cf. People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the Family Court's fact-finding determination was not against the weight of the evidence (see Family Ct Act § 342.2 [2]; cf. People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645 [2006]).

Specifically, with respect to criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, contrary to the appellant's contention, the Family Court properly applied the so-called "automobile presumption" (see Penal Law § 265.15 [3]; Matter of Jonathan V., 55 AD3d 273, 278 [2008]; Matter of Tamara E., 19 AD3d 489, 490 [2005]; People v O'Brien, 212 AD2d 741, 742 [1995]; People v Hines, 173 AD2d 730, 730-731 [1991]). There is no merit to the appellant's contention that the presentment agency did not offer any evidence that he had knowledge of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
46 cases
  • In re Jzamaine E.M.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • May 3, 2017
    ...Court's fact-finding determination was not against the weight of the evidence (see Family Ct. Act § 342.2[2] ; Matter of Darnell C., 66 A.D.3d 771, 772, 887 N.Y.S.2d 211 ; cf. People v. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 644–645, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902 ). The record does not support the appell......
  • In re Macye Mc.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 8, 2011
    ...favorable to the presentment agency ( see Matter of David H., 69 N.Y.2d 792, 793, 513 N.Y.S.2d 111, 505 N.E.2d 621; Matter of Darnell C., 66 A.D.3d 771, 772, 887 N.Y.S.2d 211), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant committed an act ......
  • In re Southern
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 12, 2014
    ...deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor ( see Matter of Darnell C., 66 A.D.3d 771, 772, 887 N.Y.S.2d 211; cf. People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053; People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S......
  • In re Terry J.P.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • May 29, 2013
    ...of Kalexis R., 85 A.D.3d 927, 928–929, 925 N.Y.S.2d 356;Matter of Macye Mc., 82 A.D.3d 892, 894, 918 N.Y.S.2d 542;Matter of Darnell C., 66 A.D.3d 771, 772, 887 N.Y.S.2d 211;cf. People v. Mateo, 2 N.Y.3d 383, 410, 779 N.Y.S.2d 399, 811 N.E.2d 1053,cert. denied542 U.S. 946, 124 S.Ct. 2929, 15......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT