In re Ahmed I.

There was nothing in appellant’s counsel’s summation, or in any other aspect of the fact-finding hearing, that was sufficient to raise a justification defense. Accordingly, his claim that the presentment agency failed to disprove that defense is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we also reject it on the merits. We also find that the court’s finding was not against the weight of the *320evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning credibility. We…