Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reversing the defendant's convictions of grand larceny in the fourth degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree, and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, and vacating the sentences imposed thereon, and the first and second counts of the indictment charging the defendant with grand larceny in the fourth degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree are dismissed, without prejudice to the People to represent any appropriate lesser charges to another Grand Jury (see, People v. Beslanovics, 57 N.Y.2d 726); as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and a new trial is ordered on the third count of the indictment charging the defendant with criminal mischief in the fourth degree.
The evidence produced by the People was not legally sufficient to support either the defendant's conviction of grand larceny in the fourth degree or his conviction of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree (see generally, People v Behlog, 74 N.Y.2d 237; People v. Young, 168 A.D.2d 658; People v Davis, 151 A.D.2d 596; People v. Govan, 149 A.D.2d 729). We also find that the court's instructions to the jury improperly suggested that the victim's alleged ownership of the property in question had been established. This error may have affected the jury's verdict with respect to the two crimes noted above, as well as with respect to the crime of criminal mischief in the fourth degree.
In connection with those counts of the indictment which must be dismissed, we grant leave to the People to represent any appropriate lesser charges to another Grand Jury (see, People v Beslanovics, 57 N.Y.2d 726, supra). A new trial is ordered with respect to the defendant's conviction of criminal mischief in the fourth degree (see, People v. Brooks, 76 N.Y.2d 746). Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Bracken and Copertino, JJ., concur.