Opinion
February 16, 1993
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Silverman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
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).
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, we find that the remarks made by the prosecutor during summation constituted fair comment on the evidence rather than misconduct (see, e.g., People v Ayala, 120 A.D.2d 600; People v Baldo, 107 A.D.2d 751). In addition, the County Court's exercise of its discretion in connection with its Sandoval ruling was not improvident (see, e.g., People v Toro, 161 A.D.2d 819; People v Ricks, 135 A.D.2d 844; People v Scott, 118 A.D.2d 881), and the County Court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony (see, e.g., People v Hawkins, 126 A.D.2d 747; People v Cody, 153 A.D.2d 897).
The defendant's final contention is likewise meritless (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.