Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency ( see Matter of David H., 69 NY2d 792), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the findings of the Family Court that the appellant had committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crimes of grand larceny in the fourth degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree. The appellant's "course of conduct before, during and after the robbery was inconsistent with that of a mere bystander and established his accessorial liability" ( Matter of Justice G., 22 AD3d 368, 369; see Matter of Louis C., 6 AD3d 430).