Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly declined to suppress the complainant's identification testimony. Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the photo array that was shown to the complainant was not unduly suggestive, as the individuals in the photo array were sufficiently similar in appearance to the defendant ( see People v Lee, 96 NY2d 157, 163; People v Wright, 297 AD2d 391; People v Guzman, 220 AD2d 614; People v Hoehne, 203 AD2d 480; People v Robert, 184 AD2d 597).