Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the court failed to give the minimal charge on identification warranted by the evidence is not preserved for appellate review. Reviewing the contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction, we agree that the charge should have stated that the People have the burden of proving identification beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Whalen, 59 N.Y.2d 273; People v. Perez, 140 A.D.2d 461; People v Knowell, 94 A.D.2d 255). However, in light of the overwhelming evidence of the guilt of the defendant, we find the error harmless (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v Grant, 132 A.D.2d 619).
We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit (see, People v. Mayas, 137 A.D.2d 836; People v. Milom, 75 A.D.2d 68; see also, People v. Kong, 131 A.D.2d 783). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.