Opinion
September 26, 2000.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.), rendered January 24, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of four counts of robbery in the first degree, one count of robbery in the second degree and three counts of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to four terms of 25 years, one term of 15 years and three terms of 1 year, all to run concurrently, unanimously affirmed.
Eleanor J. Ostrow, for respondent.
Cynthia Colt, for defendant-appellant.
Before: Lerner, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley, Friedman, JJ.
The trial court properly precluded defendant from presenting evidence that a complainant in an unrelated robbery had misidentified defendant as her assailant where the proposed evidence did not show "a clear connection" between the perpetrator of the other robbery and the robberies with which defendant was charged "and raised no more than a mere suspicion" that another man who resembles defendant had committed the charged robberies (see,People v. Coleman, 186 A.D.2d 509, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 787, citing,inter alia, People v. Johnson_, 47 N.Y.2d 785, cert denied 444 U.S. 857; see also, People v. Zanfordino, 157 A.D.2d 682,lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 971). Defendant's claim that the admission of a videotaped conditional examination of one of the complainants violated his right to confrontation and CPL 670.10 is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v. Watson, 85 N.Y.2d 920, 921), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice, particularly given defendant's affirmative use of such evidence on summation (see, People v. Gomez, 253 A.D.2d 719, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 982). We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.