Opinion
April 19, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Appleman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the People failed to adduce legally sufficient evidence establishing his identity as one of the gunmen beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Logan, 74 N.Y.2d 859; People v McNeil, 183 A.D.2d 790; People v Caballero, 177 A.D.2d 496). In any event, the defendant's contention is without merit. The record reveals that one of the complainants observed the defendant and spoke with him for almost 20 minutes in illuminated rooms. Another complainant testified that he looked at the defendant for 20 to 25 seconds and had an unobstructed view of him. Both of these complainants made unequivocal in-court identifications of the defendant as one of the robbers.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15). Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Sullivan and Lawrence, JJ., concur.