Opinion
March 4, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Charles J. Tejada, J., Berkman, J.
Contrary to defendant's contention on appeal, the court substantially complied with the mandate of People v. Smith ( 79 N.Y.2d 309). The jury was charged that the proof had to establish all of the elements of a crime to warrant a conviction, and that forcible theft involves the use or threatened use of force for the purpose of preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of property. The court clearly distinguished a "forcible" larceny, from the lesser included "simple" charge of petit larceny.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.