Opinion
May 31, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Angela Mazzarelli, J.).
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), we find that the evidence was sufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict. Moreover, upon an independent review of the facts, we find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). The issues raised by defendant concerning the credibility of prosecution witnesses, including those that arose from testimony concerning the police surveillance of defendant and the circumstances surrounding his arrest, were properly placed before the jury, and, after considering the relative force of the conflicting testimony and the competing inferences that may be drawn therefrom we find no reason to disturb its determination, particularly in view of the substantial physical evidence confirming the police testimony.
Taken as a whole, the charge conveyed that defendant's identity had to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and accordingly defendant was not prejudiced by the court's refusal to give an extended identification charge (see, People v. Perez, 164 A.D.2d 839, affd 77 N.Y.2d 928).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ross, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.