Opinion
May 13, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pincus, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court, which saw and heard the witnesses, found that the lineup in question was not suggestive ( see, e.g, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759), and we find no reason on this record to disturb its determination. Moreover, in light of the defendant's failure to request any relief at trial regarding the alleged Rosario violation, the defendant's claim in this regard is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Rogelio, 79 N.Y.2d 843).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or not otherwise properly before this Court. Thompson, J.P., Santucci, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.