From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ferrara

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 3, 1986
121 A.D.2d 159 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

June 3, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Bell, J.).


The complaining witness contended that he was carrying his methadone, which he had picked up at a clinic in which he was enrolled, in a briefcase and that the bag was knocked from his hand, with the defendant being identified as the culprit. It was the defendant's contention that he had previously purchased methadone from the complaining witness which turned out not to be authentic, and that he was remonstrating with him when the briefcase fell to the ground; that the defendant intended to take one of the methadone bottles therein as a substitute when the complaining witness began to raise a rumpus and, in fear, the defendant ran off with the briefcase and, in an abandoned building, removed the methadone and left the briefcase.

The People properly concede that defense counsel's timely request that petit larceny, a lesser included offense of grand larceny (CPL 1.20; People v. Blume, 48 A.D.2d 616), be charged, should have been granted, and that a reasonable view of the evidence was that defendant took the briefcase from the ground rather than from the person of the complaining witness. The lesser included offense should have been submitted. (People v. Scarborough, 49 N.Y.2d 364, 369-370.)

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Kupferman, Asch, Kassal and Rosenberger, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Ferrara

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 3, 1986
121 A.D.2d 159 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

People v. Ferrara

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MICHAEL FERRARA…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 3, 1986

Citations

121 A.D.2d 159 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

People v. Cooper

In contrast, grand larceny in the fourth degree requires proof that the stolen property is valued in excess…

People v. Cooper

In contrast, grand larceny in the fourth degree requires proof that the stolen property is valued in excess…