Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: SHARON T., A Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant. Presentment Agency.
Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered on or about October 2, 1996, adjudicating appellant a juvenile delinquent and placing her with the Division for Youth for 1 year upon a fact-finding determination that she had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would constitute criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree and criminally possessing a hypodermic needle, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Appellant's suppression motion was properly denied. A review of the record supports the determination of the hearing court that once properly detained in the Youth Services office in the Port Authority Bus Terminal, appellant consented to the search of her knapsack. In this regard, we note that “[i]n reviewing the suppression court's rulings ․ where different inferences may be drawn from the proof, the choice of inferences rests with the trier of fact and should not be rejected by an appellate court unless unsupported as a matter of law.” (Matter of Robert S., 159 A.D.2d 358, 359, 552 N.Y.S.2d 943, appeal dismissed 76 N.Y.2d 770, 559 N.Y.S.2d 979, 559 N.E.2d 673). Furthermore, in view of the fact that appellant accompanied the first officer to the Youth Services office without protest, that she was questioned by only one officer there, and that the officer searched appellant's knapsack for identification at appellant's own urging, we conclude that the presentment agency met its heavy burden of establishing consent (People v. Gonzalez, 39 N.Y.2d 122, 128, 383 N.Y.S.2d 215, 347 N.E.2d 575; People v. Zimmerman, 101 A.D.2d 294, 475 N.Y.S.2d 127). In any event, appellant's detention pursuant to Family Court Act § 718 was, as a matter of law, a full custodial arrest, which justified the officer's search of appellant's knapsack as incident to her lawful arrest (Matter of Jamel J., 246 A.D.2d 388, 667 N.Y.S.2d 732; Matter of Michael J., 233 A.D.2d 198, 650 N.Y.S.2d 6; Matter of Mark Anthony G., 169 A.D.2d 89, 93, 571 N.Y.S.2d 481).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: March 03, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)