Opinion
2000-09759
Argued December 9, 2002.
August 4, 2003.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), rendered October 16, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y., for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Camille O'Hara Gillespie of counsel), for respondent.
Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, THOMAS A. ADAMS, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury reasonably could have concluded, based upon the victim's identification testimony, that the defendant was the person who committed the crimes. The victim was able to recall, inter alia, his facial features, height, and build with sufficient clarity to inform police officers, shortly after the incident, that the defendant bore an uncanny resemblance to the detective in charge of the investigation ( see People v. Arroyo, 54 N.Y.2d 567, 578, cert denied sub nom Arroyo v. New York, 456 U.S. 979; see also People v. DiPaolo, 221 A.D.2d 463). This testimony was supported by photographs in evidence of the defendant and the detective at the time of the arrest. Furthermore, the jury was able to observe the similarities between the defendant and the detective during the detective's testimony at trial. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15).
ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, ADAMS and MASTRO, JJ., concur.