People v. Diaz

184 A.D.2d 327, 584 N.Y.S.2d 827, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8161

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Tonetti, J.), rendered November 14, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of imprisonment of l-% to 5 years, unanimously affirmed.

Sufficient evidence that the value of the stolen car exceeded the statutory threshold of $3,000 was presented by the complaint report offered by the defense (see, People v Goldstein, 120 AD2d 471, 472-473, lv denied 68 NY2d 757) listing a value of $15,000 and indicating a wide difference between the cost of the item and the threshold (see, People v Carter, 19 NY2d 967), the fact that the car was a late model, eliminating any risk of rapid depreciation (supra), and the photograph of the car showing it to be in good condition (see, People v Williams, 143 AD2d 566, affd 74 NY2d 675). The jury could thus properly infer that the market value of the car exceeded $3,000 minimum at the time of the theft (see, People v White, 167 AD2d 256, lv denied 77 NY2d 912).

Defendant’s contention that the indictment was duplicitous has not been preserved as a matter of law for appellate review, and we therefore decline to reach it in the interest of justice (CPL 470.05 [2]). Were we to review, we would nonetheless affirm, since the count charging the occurrence of the crime "on or about” a certain date is not duplicitous (see, People v Morris, 61 NY2d 290, 294), and the prosecutor’s reference to defendant having the keys a few days after the incident was not a reference to a separate crime of possession but of conduct indicative of continued knowing and intentional possession of the car (see, People v Van Luven, 96 AD2d 805, 806 [Alexander, J., concurring], affd 64 NY2d 625). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Kassal and Smith, JJ.