The defendant's contention that the eyewitness' identification testimony was incredible is without merit in light of the fact that the witness knew the defendant from the neighborhood for at least six or seven months prior to the incident (see, People v Butler, 150 A.D.2d 789, 790-791, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 806). Moreover, there is no basis to disturb the hearing court's resolution of credibility issues (see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759).
Although the trial court erred in precluding defense counsel from questioning the witness about the facts underlying his youthful offender adjudication since they impacted on the issue of credibility (see, People v. Scoon, 130 A.D.2d 597; People v Warner, 52 A.D.2d 684), under the circumstances presented, where the jury was informed that he had a prior criminal history, such error was harmless (see, People v. Allen, 50 N.Y.2d 898). The defendant's challenge to additional rulings of the court with regard to cross-examination is unfounded, as those rulings fell within the proper exercise of the court's discretion (see, People v. Schwartzman, 24 N.Y.2d 241, cert denied 396 U.S. 846).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.