Opinion
December 27, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his identity as the perpetrator beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Caballero, 177 A.D.2d 496). 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 (see, CPL 470.15).
Furthermore, we find that the trial court acted properly in asking the complainant, who had a language difficulty, a limited number of questions in order to clarify certain unclear answers (see, People v Buckheit, 95 A.D.2d 814).
Finally, the defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Miller, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.