Opinion
December 1, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Felice K. Shea, J.).
Defendant's contention that the testimony of one police officer concerning another officer's confirmatory drive-by identification of defendant constituted improper bolstering is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05), and, in any event, without merit (see, People v Gonzalez, 172 A.D.2d 276, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 995). Also, unpreserved, and, in any event, without merit, is defendant's challenge to the People's rebuttal testimony, which properly addressed facts that were first put in issue by the defense after the People's direct case (CPL 260.30).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Wallach, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.