Opinion
August 15, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demakos, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
The overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt included identifications of him by two of the victims of the incident. Both of these people recognized the defendant because they had seen him previously on numerous occasions. We note that the trial court gave the defendant's attorney ample latitude in his examination of the witnesses and in his summation. Any erroneous evidentiary rulings by the trial court must be regarded as harmless. Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.