The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. On the contrary, the evidence, which included a video surveillance tape, was overwhelming. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury's determinations concerning identification and credibility.
The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's mistrial motion based on a witness's inadvertent reference to a photographic identification of defendant. The court's strong curative instruction was sufficient to alleviate any possible prejudice to defendant (see, People v. Santiago, 52 N.Y.2d 865). In any event, any error was harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt. Moreover, any suggestion that defendant had a prior record was rendered harmless by defendant's own testimony admitting her prior conviction (see, People v. Scott, 276 A.D.2d 371, 714 N.Y.S.2d 62).
We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence.
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.