Opinion
July 24, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Juviler, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
On this appeal, the defendant claims, inter alia, that his conviction is against the weight of the evidence and is based on legally insufficient evidence. The defendant contends that the People have failed to establish his identity as one of the perpetrators and have further failed to demonstrate by sufficient evidence that the complainant was ever robbed of any property. The basis of these arguments is the defendant's claim that the complainant's testimony was contradictory and incredible as a matter of law.
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. Furthermore, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we find that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15).
We note that the sentence imposed upon defendant was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80) and we find no basis to exercise our discretion to reduce it in the interest of justice.
We have examined the defendant's remaining contention and find that it does not warrant reversal. Bracken, J.P., Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.