THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK RESPONDENT v. STEPHEN FRANCIS DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2010)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum:  Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of grand larceny in the third degree (Penal Law § 155.35) and petit larceny (§ 155.25).   We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied his right to be informed of the charges against him based upon the failure of the People to specify whether they were proceeding under a theory of larceny by false pretenses (§ 155.05[2][a] ) or by commission of the crime of issuing a bad check (§ 155.05[2][c] ).  “The People are not required to specify any particular theory of larceny in the indictment ․ [, and t]he present indictment and discovery provided sufficient information to prepare and present a defense” (People v. Cannon, 194 A.D.2d 496, 498, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 715, 805;  see People v. Farruggia, 41 A.D.2d 894).   The general motion by defendant for a trial order of dismissal failed to preserve for our review his further contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction (see People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19).   Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crimes as charged to the jury (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).

Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court