Opinion
December 29, 1993
Appeal from the Niagara County Court, DiFlorio, J.
Present — Pine, J.P., Balio, Lawton, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of robbery in the third degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree, defendant argues that the testimony of the victim was incredible as a matter of law and that the court failed to define the terms "deprive" and "appropriate" in its charge on the elements of the crimes. Those issues are unpreserved for our review and we decline to reach them in the interest of justice. We disagree with defendant's contention that the court improperly marshalled the evidence and assisted the People in the presentation of their case, thereby depriving defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Saunders, 64 N.Y.2d 665, 667; cf., People v Jacobsen, 140 A.D.2d 938, 940). The proof of force against the victim is legally sufficient and the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Zagorski, 135 A.D.2d 594, 595; see generally, People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).