DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
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 of robbery in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15).
The police had reasonable suspicion to pursue, stop, and detain the defendant based upon the contents of a police dispatcher's radio broadcast providing a general description of the perpetrator which matched the description of the defendant, the close proximity of the defendant to the site of the crime, and the short passage of time between the commission of the crime and the observation of the defendant ( see People v. Scott, 237 A.D.2d 543; People v. Ellison, 222 A.D.2d 693, 694). Although the victim was aware that he would be looking at a potential suspect, the showup was conducted in close geographical and temporal proximity to the crime, and it was not unduly suggestive ( see People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541, 544-545; People v. Ellison, supra; cf. People v. Ortiz, 90 N.Y.2d 533, 537).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are without merit.
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.