Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was denied a fair trial by the court's failure to preclude the identification testimony of one of the prosecution witnesses, who had previously identified the defendant in a photographic array, and for whom the defense received no CPL 710.30 notice. While we agree that the court should have precluded the identification testimony of this witness (see, CPL 710.30 [b]; [3]; People v McMullin, 70 N.Y.2d 855, 856), we find that, even without this testimony, the evidence of the defendant's guilt was overwhelming, and the error was, therefore, harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v Manson, 176 A.D.2d 294; People v Mole, 147 A.D.2d 714).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or, to the extent that there was error, harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Mangano, P.J., Pizzuto, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.