Opinion
February 13, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (J. Goldberg, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the court's expanded identification charge was imbalanced because, among other things, the charge did not include significant pro-defense factors is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. O'Brien, J.P., Copertino, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.