Opinion
February 5, 1996
Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Vaughn, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by directing that all the sentences shall be concurrent; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.
Under Indictment No. 168/92, the defendant was charged with criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree for his sale of cocaine to an undercover police officer on November 13, 1991. The same indictment also charged the defendant with criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree for unlawfully possessing cocaine with an aggregate weight of 1/8 ounce or more on November 21, 1991, and for possessing cocaine with the intent to sell it on the same date.
The defendant contends that the undercover police officer's viewing of a photograph of him two days after the November 13, 1991, transaction was unduly suggestive. However, as the County Court correctly found, this identification procedure was purely confirmatory, i.e., to ascertain whether the correct individual would be arrested (cf., People v. Waring, 183 A.D.2d 271, 273; see also, People v. Veale, 169 A.D.2d 939, affd 78 N.Y.2d 1022).
The record reveals that the defendant's trial counsel provided him with meaningful representation (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137; People v. Jefferson, 156 A.D.2d 716).
The defendant's sentence was excessive to the extent indicated.
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05) or without merit. Santucci, J.P., Altman, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.