The showup procedure herein was appropriate in view of defendant's attempt to meet the victim three weeks after the crimes and, indeed, was unavoidable because prevailing circumstances compelled the police to secure defendant within view of the victim, who was at the scene for the specific purpose of identifying the suspect (see, People v. Williams, 141 A.D.2d 783, 785, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 1051). As the complainant testified that she was not even aware that defendant was handcuffed, and that she recognized him at first sight, the record belies defendant's claim that the showup procedure was unduly suggestive.
Viewing the evidence at trial in the light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), defendant's guilt of the crimes charged was proven by overwhelming evidence (People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490).
The sentencing court properly imposed consecutive sentences in connection with the rape and sodomy counts, as the evidence proved that each constituted a separate and distinct act (see, People v. Boyce, 133 A.D.2d 164).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Kupferman, Ross, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.