Defendant's motion to suppress identification testimony was properly denied. Although defendant's ponytail figured prominently in the witnesses' descriptions, the undisputed evidence at the hearing established that defendant and the fillers were positioned in a way that obscured defendant's ponytail. Defendant never turned sideways during the viewings, and from the perspective of the witnesses viewing the lineup, they could only see the front of defendant's face. In addition, two other fillers had some length of hair in back. Accordingly, the circumstance of defendant being the only participant in the lineup with a ponytail did not render the lineup unduly suggestive in that it did not create a substantial likelihood that defendant would be singled out for identification (see, People v. Chipp, 75 N.Y.2d 327, 335, cert denied 498 U.S. 833; People v. Diaz, 138 A.D.2d 728, lv denied, 72 N.Y.2d 858).
We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.