DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly denied that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony. "A photographic array is suggestive where some characteristic of [an individual's] picture draws the viewer's attention to it, indicating that the police have made a particular selection" (People v. Robert, 184 A.D.2d 597, 598). Contrary to the defendant's contention, there is no indication that his photograph differed significantly from the photographs of the fillers (see, People v. Butts, 279 A.D.2d 587).
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 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).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, not properly before this court, or without merit.
H. MILLER, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.