Opinion
November 23, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Kuffner, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Although the defendant's two robbery convictions are based on separate incidents, both incidents involved a robbery during which the defendant displayed an object which appeared to be a pistol (see, Penal Law § 160.15). Therefore, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a severance and separate trials (see, CPL 200.20 [c]; [3]; People v. Lane, 56 N.Y.2d 1, 7; People v. Mack, 111 A.D.2d 186, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 616). Furthermore, we see no merit to the defendant's argument that the People failed to prove his guilt of these crimes beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Baskerville, 60 N.Y.2d 374; see also, People v. Saez, 69 N.Y.2d 802) and we find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15). Mangano, J.P., Weinstein, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.