Opinion
March 16, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Marshall, J.
Present — Denman, J.P., Pine, Lawton, Davis and Lowery, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant's argument that evidence relating to his bootprints was improperly admitted is unpreserved for review. Defense counsel not only failed to object to testimony concerning the bootprints but joined in the motion to admit the photographs of the bootprints. We find that the proof of identity in this circumstantial evidence case was legally sufficient (see, People v Brooks, 92 A.D.2d 1035; see generally, People v Marin, 65 N.Y.2d 741, 742), and that defendant's sentence was not harsh and excessive.