Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the presentment agency, we find that given the volatility of the crowd growing around officers attempting to effectuate a drug arrest, a direct result of the appellant's words and conduct, the court properly concluded that appellant created a danger of imminent lawless action as proscribed by Penal Law § 240.08 ( see People v. Tolia, 214 A.D.2d 57, 65, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 1025). Appellant's inappropriate, disruptive conduct also obstructed the officers in effectuating the authorized arrests of unrelated individuals for drug related offenses (Penal Law § 195.05; People v. Tarver, 188 A.D.2d 938, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 893). In addition, the record supports the Family Court's conclusion that appellant resisted arrest, by physically struggling to avoid being handcuffed (Penal Law § 205.30; People v. Clark, 241 A.D.2d 710; lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 1010).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.