Opinion
2015-04-30
Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Marcia Egger of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Diana Lawless of counsel), for presentment agency.
Tamara A. Steckler, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Marcia Egger of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Diana Lawless of counsel), for presentment agency.
, J.P., SAXE, DeGRASSE, RICHTER, JJ.
Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Passidomo, J.), entered March 3, 2014, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding determination that he committed an act that, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of marijuana in the fifth degree, and placed him on probation for a period of 10 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly denied appellant's motion to suppress physical evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations. When a police officer asked appellant about the address of a nearby building, this did not even constitute a level one inquiry ( see People v. Thornton, 238 A.D.2d 33, 34–35, 667 N.Y.S.2d 705 [1st Dept.1998] ); in any event, the officer had the requisite “objective credible reason” ( People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210, 223, 386 N.Y.S.2d 375, 352 N.E.2d 562 [1976] ) for such an inquiry.
The court's fact-finding determination was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348–349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ). We likewise find no basis for disturbing the court's credibility determinations. The “open to public view” element of fifth-degree marijuana possession (Penal Law § 221.10[1] ) was established by evidence that defendant exposed to public view what was plainly a marijuana cigarette ( see Matter of Michael I., 309 A.D.2d 598, 765 N.Y.S.2d 615 [1st Dept.2003], lv. denied 1 N.Y.3d 508, 776 N.Y.S.2d 539, 808 N.E.2d 859 [2004] ).