Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency ( cf. People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish that the appellant committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of gang assault in the second degree (see Penal Law § 120.06; People v Edmonds, 267 AD2d 19). The appellant's intent can be inferred from his conduct and the surrounding circumstances ( cf. People v Bracey, 41 NY2d 296, 301; People v Persaud, 25 AD3d 626, 627, lv denied 6 NY3d 837; People v Santos, 14 AD3d 411, 412).
Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the findings of fact were not against the weight of the evidence ( cf. CPL 470.15).