On June 2, 1990, the defendant and an accomplice forcibly stole property from the victim while the defendant held a sharp object in the victim's side. The defendant was quickly apprehended and a knife was recovered from his person. The indictment charged the defendant with committing the robbery while using or threatening the immediate use of a knife. The court charged the jury on the term "use" but not "threatened the immediate use". On appeal, the defendant claims that the evidence did not establish that he used the knife to rob the victim. We disagree.
The evidence before the jury showed beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15; People v. Pena, 50 N.Y.2d 400, 407, n 2).
In the circumstances here present, the charge, to which no exception was taken, adequately conveyed the appropriate legal principles to the jury (People v. Dekle, 56 N.Y.2d 835).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Asch and Rubin, JJ.