| Matter of Gregory N. |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 05080 [108 AD3d 553] |
| July 3, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Gregory N., a Person Alleged to be aJuvenile Delinquent, Appellant. |
—[*1] Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Pamela Seider Dolgowand Ellen Ravitch of counsel), for respondent.
In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, GregoryN. appeals from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Kings County (Ambrosio,J.), dated April 4, 2012, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court datedFebruary 22, 2012, made after a hearing, finding that he had committed an act which, ifcommitted by an adult, would have constituted the crime of criminal possession of aweapon in the fourth degree and committed the offense of unlawful possession ofweapons by persons under sixteen, adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent, and placedhim on probation for a period of 12 months. The appeal from the order of dispositionbrings up for review the fact-finding order and the denial, after a hearing, of that branchof the appellant's omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence.
Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed theappellant on probation for a period of 12 months is dismissed as academic, without costsor disbursements, as the period of probation has expired; and it is further,
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs ordisbursements.
The appellant failed to preserve for appellate review his arguments with respect tothe impropriety of the adjournment of his fact-finding hearing (see Matter of Yarras F., 5AD3d 481 [2004]; Matter of Kovan Clearance D., 288 AD2d 219 [2001]).In any event, his right to a speedy fact-finding hearing (see Family Ct Act§ 340.1 [1]) was not violated in light of the need to resolve his pendingsuppression motion (see Matter of Willie E., 88 NY2d 205, 209-210 [1996]; Matter of Thomas L., 52 AD3d716 [2008]).
Moreover, that branch of the appellant's omnibus motion which was to suppressphysical evidence was properly denied. The police officer was justified in detaining theappellant as a suspected truant (see Matter of Shannon B., 70 NY2d 458, 462[1987]) and, under the circumstances, was further justified in seizing the knife he sawprotruding from the appellant's pants pocket in plain view, even though he did not knowat the time whether or not the knife was illegal (see People v [*2]Miranda, 19NY3d 912, 914 [2012]). Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Austin and Cohen, JJ., concur.