Opinion
January 25, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jerome Hornblass, 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. 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 the victim and the reliability of his identification of defendant as the robber were properly placed before the jury and we find no reason to disturb its determination. The victim's out-of-court identification was properly admitted (CPL 60.25), as was his voluntarily given post-arrest statement, where the hearing court reasonably chose to credit the testimony of the officer who took the statement ( People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761).
The trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying counsel's eve-of-trial application for a psychiatric examination of defendant pursuant to CPL article 730 ( see, People v Smyth, 3 N.Y.2d 184, 186-187; People v Gensler, 72 N.Y.2d 239, 244-245, cert denied 488 U.S. 932). The trial court's observations and the totality of circumstances overwhelmingly support the conclusion that defendant was feigning mental illness.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Wallach, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.