Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the police unlawfully stopped him. The police had reasonable suspicion to stop and detain the defendant for a few minutes so that the complainant could view him, because he matched the description given by the complainant of one of the three perpetrators and he and his two companions were found in close temporal and geographic proximity to the robbery ( see, People v. De Bour, 40 N.Y.2d 210; People v. Bond, 227 A.D.2d 412, affd 90 N.Y.2d 877; People v. Ryan, 224 A.D.2d 644).
The defendant's contention-that the trial court goaded him into requesting a mistrial is not supported by the record. His second trial, therefore, was not barred by double jeopardy ( see, Oregon v. Kennedy, 456 U.S. 667).
Finally, the defendant was not entitled to a missing witness charge as the testimony of the uncalled police witness would have been only cumulative, in light of the testimony of another police witness ( see, People v. Antoneddy, 226 A.D.2d 549; People v. Lee, 217 A.D.2d 637).
Miller, J. P., Sullivan, Santucci and Lerner, JJ., concur.