ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The identification testimony of the complaining witness was proper. Although the hearing court found the photographic and lineup procedures to be defective, it correctly found that there was an independent source for the in-court identification of the defendant. The witness had a clear and unobstructed view of the defendant, under well-lit conditions, for a 15-second period during the commission of the crime (see People v. Androvett, 135 A.D.2d 640; People v. Washington, 111 A.D.2d 418).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either without merit or not properly before this court.
SANTUCCI, J.P., ALTMAN, FLORIO and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.