Opinion
November 24, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J.).
The jury had ample ground to convict based on the complainant's strong and unequivocal identification testimony (see, People v Hawkins, 155 A.D.2d 617). Any error in admitting bolstering hearsay was harmless in view of the complainant's strong identification (People v Jones, 170 A.D.2d 360, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 996).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.