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 physical injury and therefore legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of robbery in the second degree 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 showup identification of the defendant was not police-arranged and, in any event, was not suggestive (see, People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541).
The defendant's claim that his sentence was excessive because it was in excess of the term of imprisonment offered during a plea negotiation is without merit. It is firmly established that sentences imposed after trial may be more severe than those proposed in connection with a plea bargain (see, People v. Pena, 50 N.Y.2d 400, cert denied 449 U.S. 1087; People v. Clarke, 195 A.D.2d 569).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J.P., Rosenblatt, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.