Opinion
Argued November 8, 1999
December 20, 1999
In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Richmond County (Clark, J.), dated February 9, 1998, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated December 11, 1997, made after a hearing, found that the appellant had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed him with the New York State Division for Youth for a period of 12 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order and the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the appellant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.
Monica Drinane, New York, N.Y. (Susan Clement of counsel), for appellant.
Michael D. Hess, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Kristin M. Helmers and A. Orli Spanier of counsel), for respondent.
FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., DANIEL W. JOY, ANITA R. FLORIO, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Family Court properly determined that the police officer who ultimately seized a gun from a van was justified in approaching that van, which had been standing with its engine idling, and directing its occupants to exit, based upon his reasonable suspicion that the occupants of the van were smoking marihuana (see, People v. McLaurin, 70 N.Y.2d 779, 781-782 ; People v. Heston, 152 A.D.2d 999 ; People v. Barnes, 149 A.D.2d 359 ; People v. Hill, 148 A.D.2d 546 ; People v. Cunningham, 141 A.D.2d 557 ). Because the officer had the right to be in the position from which he observed the gun on the rear seat of the van, the plain view doctrine applied (see,People v. Diaz, 81 N.Y.2d 106, 109-111 ; People v. Shapiro, 141 A.D.2d 577 ), and the seizure of the gun was appropriate.
SANTUCCI, J.P., JOY, FLORIO, and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.