ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
We find no merit to the defendant's contention that he was arrested without probable cause. The hearing record demonstrates that the arrest was predicated upon the photographic identifications of the defendant by two eyewitnesses (see, People v. Nixon, 240 A.D.2d 764 ; People v. Hill, 212 A.D.2d 632 ). Moreover, the detectives had received information that someone named "Sundula" was involved in the shooting, and were aware that the defendant used that unusual nickname (see, People v. Burton, 194 A.D.2d 683 ;People v. Mitchell, 166 A.D.2d 676 ).
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[5]).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
S. MILLER, J.P., O'BRIEN, RITTER, and FLORIO, JJ., concur.