PEOPLE v. LINO

Judgments affirmed.

The complaining witness's chance viewing of the defendant in the street without any police present was not an identification procedure (see, People v. Dukes, 97 A.D.2d 445), and the witness's in-court identification of the defendant was properly admitted at trial. The defendant's other contentions are either unpreserved (see, People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636), or without merit (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621). Lazer, J.P., Brown, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.