Opinion
May 28, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (William H. Wallace, III, J.).
Defendant, who was tried in absentia, argues that the evidence of guilt was insufficient given that neither the undercover nor arresting officer was able to identify a photograph of him exhibited by defense counsel at the trial. We disagree. Such was merely a factor for the jury to consider in determining the credibility of the People's witnesses and the reliability of their identification of defendant (People v. Gruttola, 43 N.Y.2d 116, 122). Nor is there merit to defendant's argument that the sentence is excessive, given that he is a second felony offender with an extensive criminal record accumulated within a relatively short period of time after his arrival in this country (People v Junco, 43 A.D.2d 266, 268, affd 35 N.Y.2d 419, cert denied 421 U.S. 951).
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Wallach, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.