Opinion
March 20, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim of error in the court's charge on identification is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; see, People v. Hoke, 62 N.Y.2d 1022; People v Golden, 211 A.D.2d 729; People v. Aparicio, 208 A.D.2d 638; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, the charge in this case, when viewed in its entirety, was proper (see, People v Russell, 266 N.Y. 147, 151; People v. Saunders, 64 N.Y.2d 665, 667; see also, People v. Golden, supra; People v. Aparicio, supra; People v. Foxworth, 197 A.D.2d 703). The court instructed the jury on the appropriate principles of law and did not prejudice the defendant in any way. The jury was told that identification had to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and the jury was provided with general instructions in weighing the witness's credibility (see, People v. Whalen, 59 N.Y.2d 273; People v. Santiago, 210 A.D.2d 513; People v. Aparicio, supra).
Finally, the defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Lawrence, J.P., Pizzuto, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.