Opinion
September 19, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Murray Mogel, J.).
Defendant's guilt was proven by legally sufficient evidence, and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. The identification of the surveilling police officer, who observed defendant from a rooftop vantage point for some 20 minutes twice exchange vials for money, was not unreliable simply because the officer lost sight of defendant after the second sale and did not radio his description until he reappeared 10 to 15 minutes later ( see, People v Betancourt, 168 A.D.2d 276, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 875). The testimony of one eyewitness, if credited, is sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( see, People v Arroyo, 54 N.Y.2d 567, 578, cert denied 456 U.S. 979), and credibility of such a witness is enhanced where, as here, he is "trained and experienced * * * [in] the detection of criminal activity and the apprehension and conviction of the perpetrator" ( People v Morales, 37 N.Y.2d 262, 271). Further corroboration of the officer's identification is found in his accurate description of the two buyers. On the record before us, we find no basis to disturb the jury's determinations of credibility and identification ( see, People v Mosley, 112 A.D.2d 812, 813-814, affd 67 N.Y.2d 985).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rubin, Kupferman, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.