Opinion
October 20, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (James J. Leff, J.).
Defendant was arrested after he was observed by police officers driving a car that had been reported stolen several days before. At the time of the arrest, defendant was wearing a jacket later identified as a Transit Authority jacket that the owner of the car, a Transit Authority employee, said she had left in the trunk, and carrying an imitation pistol. Other personal items belonging to the victim were found in the car, including car keys on a Transit Authority key ring, a Transit Authority shield, and handcuffs. Viewing this evidence in a light most favorable to the People (People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), it was sufficient as a matter of law to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant knew that the car had been stolen, even in the absence of a charge that such knowledge could be inferred from defendant's recent and unexplained exclusive possession of the car. Indeed, it was nothing more than simple logic for the jury, on its own, to infer defendant's knowledge that the car was stolen from his recent and exclusive possession of it and other items belonging to the victim.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.