DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the pretrial identification procedures were not unduly suggestive ( see People v. Chipp, 75 N.Y.2d 327, cert denied 498 U.S. 833). In addition, the issue of whether the defendant was deprived of his right to confrontation when a witness invoked the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination regarding affiliation with a gang is unpreserved for appellate review. In any event, the defendant's contention is without merit, as the witness's bias or interest was fully explored through other means ( see People v. Chin, 67 N.Y.2d 22).
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, 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 his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15).
SMITH, J.P., McGINITY, H. MILLER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.