The court's fact-finding determination was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The presentment agency adduced ample evidence of appellant's proximity to the drugs and packaging material to support the court's reliance on the room presumption under Penal Law § 220.25 (2), particularly given the small size of the apartment. Moreover, appellant's own testimony, which is properly considered for purposes of reviewing the legal sufficiency and weight of the evidence ( People v. Kirkpatrick, 32 N.Y.2d 17, 21, appeal dismissed 414 U.S. 948), cured any deficiency in the presentment agency's case in this respect. The record further supports the court's conclusion that appellant's testimony that she was waiting in the apartment for her friend to return and did not know the owner of the apartment failed to rebut the presumption.
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Nardelli, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.