Opinion
June 12, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Quinones, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly denied suppression of the station house showup identifications. While such showups are generally disfavored (see, People v. Riley, 70 N.Y.2d 523), the People elicited hearing testimony establishing that the eyewitnesses knew the defendant. The defendant did not challenge the witnesses' familiarity with him (cf., People v. Rodriguez, 79 N.Y.2d 445). Therefore, he has failed to preserve for appellate review his present contention in this regard (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Gomez, 67 N.Y.2d 843; People v. Campbell, 187 A.D.2d 442). Since the uncontradicted evidence demonstrated that the showup identifications were merely confirmatory in nature, any questions regarding suggestiveness and independent source were rendered irrelevant (see, People v. Gissendanner, 48 N.Y.2d 543; People v. Creech, 183 A.D.2d 777; People v. Lizardi, 166 A.D.2d 672), and the defendant's request to call the eyewitnesses at the hearing to explore these issues was properly denied (see, People v. Chipp, 75 N.Y.2d 327, cert denied 498 U.S. 833; People v Galarza, 206 A.D.2d 387; People v. Bolden, 197 A.D.2d 528).
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. 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).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Miller, Pizzuto and Friedmann, JJ., concur.