Opinion
December 27, 1994
Appeal from the County Court, Orange County (Berry, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The findings of the hearing court are to be accorded great deference and should not be set aside on appeal unless clearly erroneous (see, People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759). Here, the hearing testimony established that the undercover officer who acted as the purchaser in the narcotics transaction selected the defendant's photograph, without prompting, from a book containing mug shots of 200 black males. Thus, the evidence supports the hearing court's determination that the array was not unduly suggestive (see, People v Edwards, 199 A.D.2d 574; People v Livieri, 171 A.D.2d 815, 816).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.