Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), sufficiently established his identity as one of the perpetrators of the crimes. The first victim identified the defendant from a photographic array, and both victims separately identified him at trial as one of the three perpetrators who committed the crimes of which he was convicted. 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 (see, CPL 470.15).
We further find that the imposition of consecutive terms of imprisonment for the separate and distinct crimes committed against each victim was proper (see, People v. Braithwaite, 63 N.Y.2d 839, 842-843; People v. Davis, 169 A.D.2d 774; People v Murray, 168 A.D.2d 572), and that the terms imposed on each count were neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions, including those presented in his pro se supplemental brief, and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.