From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Jamal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 5, 1992
186 A.D.2d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

October 5, 1992

Appeal from the Family Court, Kings County (Schecter, J.).


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

A private security officer observed the appellant sitting in the back seat of a parked, stolen automobile for five to seven minutes. The vehicle's ignition had been "popped". In its place was a hole the size of a half dollar into which was inserted a broken piece of metal. In addition, the radio of the vehicle was missing. Various tools, including a screwdriver and a "pulley", were subsequently recovered from the back seat.

There were two other occupants of the car, one sitting in the rear with the appellant, the third sitting in the driver's seat. A fourth individual had been observed "checking" the door handles of approximately 10 automobiles in the immediate vicinity, to see if the doors would open. Upon returning to the stolen car, this individual noticed that he was being observed by the private security officer and he and the three occupants of the car fled.

After a fact-finding hearing, the Family Court determined that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of unauthorized use of a vehicle in the third degree and possession of burglar's tools.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, since the appellant's unauthorized use of the stolen car, as well as his unlawful intent with respect to the tools found in the car, can be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the incident (see, People v Roby, 39 N.Y.2d 69; People v Borrero, 26 N.Y.2d 430; People v McCaleb, 25 N.Y.2d 394; People v Davis, 155 A.D.2d 611, 612; cf., People v Gray, 154 A.D.2d 547). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15). Mangano, P.J., Harwood, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Jamal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 5, 1992
186 A.D.2d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of Jamal

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMAL C., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 5, 1992

Citations

186 A.D.2d 562 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
588 N.Y.S.2d 369

Citing Cases

Matter of Ricardo

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Viewed in the light most favorable to the…

Matter of Jason

We find that the shoe, sneaker, or boot with which the appellant kicked the complainant, under the…