Contrary to defendant's contention on appeal, the court substantially complied with the mandate of People v. Smith ( 79 N.Y.2d 309). The jury was charged that the proof had to establish all of the elements of a crime to warrant a conviction, and that forcible theft involves the use or threatened use of force for the purpose of preventing or overcoming resistance to the taking of property. The court clearly distinguished a "forcible" larceny, from the lesser included "simple" charge of petit larceny.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.