In Matter of Jose C. (52 AD3d 253, 859 NYS2d 179 [1st Dep't 2008]), a juvenile delinquency case, the juvenile and a companion were standing behind a car with an open trunk in the early morning hours, and closed the trunk as a police officer drove up. The car was in the same place where it had been parked by the owner. The officer observed that the door lock and window had been broken, and that an ashtray full of change apparently had been removed from the car and deposited in a different car. The evidence also established that the juvenile and his companion possessed screwdrivers. On this evidence, the First Department held that the evidence was insufficient to establish unauthorized use of a vehicle: "The evidence also was insufficient to establish unauthorized use of a vehicle in violation of Penal Law 165.05(1). That crime requires "an exercise of dominion and control over the car, either mechanically or physically, to the exclusion of the owner's proprietary interest, even transitorily" (People v. Gray, 154 AD2d 547, 547, 546 NYS2d 387 [1989]). There was no evidence that appellant or his companion ever attempted to start the car, or had the means to do so. Neither appellant's presence near a vandalized car, nor the inference that he or his companion must have entered the car at some point to steal the ashtray and coins, established the requisite exercise of dominion and control (id.; see also Matter of Javier F., 3 AD3d 493, 769 NYS2d 601 [2004]; Matter of Archangel O., 157 AD2d 729, 551 NYS2d 785 [1990]; Matter of Ruben P., 151 AD2d 485, 542 NYS2d 276 [1989])." Matter of Jose C., supra at 254.