Opinion
December 8, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jerome Hornblass, J.).
Defendant confronted the complainant, to whom he was known, claiming that the complainant had been sitting on defendant's father's car. Defendant pulled a gun and fired several shots in the direction of the fleeing complainant, inadvertently wounding a bystander.
We find no basis to disturb the hearing court's findings on credibility (see, People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761), particularly its conclusion that complainant knew defendant from the neighborhood, and we note that defendant had ample opportunity to cross-examine the complainant at the hearing on the issue of the complainant's claim that he was familiar with the defendant from the neighbor (cf., People v Rodriguez, 79 N.Y.2d 445).
Defendant's claim the the complainant's identification testimony was improperly bolstered by a detective's testimony that he had arrested defendant after a lineup is unpreserved as a matter of law and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review, we would find it to be without merit (People v Middleton, 159 A.D.2d 350, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 792; see generally, People v Rice, 75 N.Y.2d 929, 932).
We have examined defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.