Opinion
September 18, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (DeLury, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the People demonstrated that the challenged identification procedures were sufficiently attenuated from his unlawful arrest (see, People v Pleasant, 54 N.Y.2d 972, cert denied 455 U.S. 924). Nor is there any merit to the defendant's contention that the photographic array was unduly suggestive (see, People v Devonish, 165 A.D.2d 723).
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, issues of credibility and reliability of identification testimony are primarily questions of fact for the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84; People v Androvett, 135 A.D.2d 640; People v Rosa, 125 A.D.2d 345; People v Caldwell, 125 A.D.2d 402). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Balletta, J.P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.