Opinion
February 18, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.).
Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. Probable cause was established by defendant's resemblance to the description provided by the undercover officer, the proximity of defendant's arrest, both in distance and in time, to the drug transaction, and the absence of anyone else meeting the description.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury's determinations; concerning credibility and identification.
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining contentions, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief.
Concur — Tom, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.