Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We conclude that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People and granting it all reasonable inferences, was legally sufficient to support defendant's convictions of grand larceny in the third degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree (People v Way, 59 N.Y.2d 361, 365; People v Benzinger, 36 N.Y.2d 29, 32). Further, the trial court did not err in refusing to charge the jury that to convict defendant of grand larceny in the third degree, the People must establish that defendant intended to steal a firearm. The People need only establish that defendant stole property (Penal Law § 155.05) and that the property stolen was in fact within one of the categories specified in Penal Law former § 155.30. There is no requirement that the People prove defendant intended to steal a particular category of property (see, People v Magee, 98 A.D.2d 874).