Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order of disposition as placed the appellant in the custody of the New York State Office of Children and Family Services for a period of 12 months is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements, as the period of placement has expired; and it is further,
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (seeMatter of David H., 69 NY2d 792, 793 [1987]; cf.People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the appellant‘s identity as the perpetrator beyond a reasonable doubt (seeFamily Ct Act § 342.2 [2]). “An identification is not precluded merely because the witness did not see the facial features of the perpetrator” (Matter of Ryan W., 143 AD2d 435, 436 [1988]). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we cannot say that the court‘s determination was against the weight of the evidence (seeMatter of James B., 262 AD2d 480, 481 [1999]; cf.CPL 470.15 [5]). Crane, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Dillon, JJ., concur.
