Opinion
August 7, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his identity as one of the perpetrators is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, 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 (CPL 470.15).
The trial court properly admitted, on the issue of identity, the complainant's testimony concerning a statement made to her by the defendant prior to the rape (see, People v. Lewis, 69 N.Y.2d 321, 325). Any error concerning the court's failure to deliver a limiting instruction regarding this testimony is unpreserved for appellate review because no such instruction was requested, and no objection was registered on this ground (see, People v. Jones, 182 A.D.2d 708, 709; People v. Mascoli, 166 A.D.2d 612). Balletta, J.P., Miller, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.