Opinion
December 29, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Corrado, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on the issue of identification. The defendant made no requests for an identification charge and, at the conclusion of the court's charge, the defendant did not take exception to the charge or ask for additional instructions even though the court solicited such exceptions and requests. Thus, he plainly failed to preserve the issue for appellate review (see, People v McCorkle, 119 A.D.2d 700). Nor is reversal warranted in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. The evidence elicited at trial did not present a close question of identification. Therefore, the trial court's charge was legally sufficient (see, People v Whalen, 59 N.Y.2d 273; People v Bishop, 144 A.D.2d 476). Copertino, J.P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.