People v. Medina

OPINION OF THE COURT

Chief Judge Lippman.

The question before the Court in this appeal from a first-degree robbery conviction is whether the trial court’s failure to charge the jury with the statutory definition of “appropriate” *101and/or “deprive,” which forms part of the definition of larcenous intent, is reversible error. We hold that it is.

The Appellate Division, although reducing the sentence, upheld the first-degree robbery conviction, finding the claimed omission from the jury charge unpreserved, and in any event non-prejudicial (67 AD3d 548 [1st Dept 2009]). A Judge of this Court granted…