Opinion
June 22, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.).
The evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the People ( People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), established that defendant had taken the victim's car keys and deprived him of his jeep for 4 hours and that during that time the car was severely vandalized, and was legally sufficient to support the conviction of grand larceny in the third degree ( see, People v. Kirnon, 39 A.D.2d 666, affd 31 N.Y.2d 877; see also, People v. Brightly, 148 A.D.2d 623, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 737). Defendant's claim that the court in its charge improperly implied to the jury that borrowing or returning the vehicle would support a conviction of grand larceny is unpreserved for appellate review since he failed to object at trial (CPL 470.05). Similarly, defendant's claim that the court improperly charged the jury not to consider subsequent facts in determining intent is also unpreserved since only the co-defendant objected. We decline to review these claims in the interest of justice. In any event, were we to review, we would find them meritless since the record does not support defendant's claims.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rubin, Asch and Williams, JJ.