Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
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 (CPL 470.15).
The trial court's identification charge was adequate. The court properly instructed the jury on weighing the witnesses' credibility, and stated that identification must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Whalen, 59 N.Y.2d 273, 279; People v. Smith, 203 A.D.2d 396). In addition, the trial court marshaled the evidence in a fair and even-handed manner and adequately alerted the jury to the defendant's theories (see, People v. Saunders, 64 N.Y.2d 665; People v. Rosero, 213 A.D.2d 500; People v. McManus, 208 A.D.2d 866).
To the limited extent that the defendant's remaining contentions are preserved for appellate review, they are without merit.
Rosenblatt, J.P., Sullivan, Pizzuto, and Friedmann, JJ., concur.