Judgment affirmed.
Defendant contends that the evidence of guilt is insufficient, particularly because the complainant's identification was based upon a brief observation of defendant at about 6:30 A.M., in dusk-like light. He also claims that he was denied a fair trial on several grounds.
In reviewing the record in the light most favorable to the People, as we are obligated to do, and bearing in mind that credibility is a factor to be determined by the jury, we find that "the record contains evidence sufficient in quantity and quality to support the verdict" ( People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757).
Moreover, we find no merit to defendant's contention that the pretrial identification procedures were impermissively suggestive ( see, e.g., People v. Rodriguez, 64 N.Y.2d 738).
We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and also find no merit to them.
Lazer, J.P., Thompson, O'Connor and Niehoff, JJ., concur.