The fact-finding determination was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Appellant's intent to appropriate the beeper from the complainant was adequately demonstrated by his stated demand that the complainant turn it over, a demand lacking any non-larcenous explanation. Defendant's conduct in abandoning the beeper was not inconsistent with the original larcenous intent ( People v. Smith, 140 A.D.2d 259, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 924).
Concur — J. P., Nardelli, Rubin, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.