OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed and a new trial ordered.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of grand larceny in the first degree (Penal Law § 155.42); attempted grand larceny in the first degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 155.42); and criminal possession of a forged instrument in the second degree (Penal Law § 170.25).

Defendant appealed, arguing, among other things, that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction on each count and that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed defendant’s convictions (People v Maldonado, 119 AD3d 610 [2d Dept 2014]).

We agree with the Appellate Division that, to the extent preserved, defendant’s legal sufficiency challenges to this trial record lack merit. However, we hold that counsel’s overall per *1175 formance fell below the “meaningful representation” standard and defendant is entitled to a new trial (see People v Berroa, 99 NY2d 134 [2002]; see also People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147 [1981]).

Order reversed and a new trial ordered, in a memorandum.