Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The record developed at the second Wade hearing supports the court's conclusion that the People met their burden of establishing an independent basis for the in-court identification of the defendant by the two identification witnesses (see, e.g., People v Washington, 111 A.D.2d 418, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 768). The hearing court properly received and considered all available evidence probative of the reliability of the identifications made of the defendant. Inasmuch as the record supports the court's conclusions, its decision is entitled to great weight and should not be disturbed (see, e.g., People v Boyce, 89 A.D.2d 623, 624).
We note, moreover, that because defense counsel on cross-examination elicited all the information regarding the suggestive station house identification of the defendant by the complainants, the defendant cannot be deemed to have been prejudiced thereby.
We have examined the remaining contentions raised by defendant on the appeal and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.