Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fertig, J.), rendered May 11, 1989, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We do not agree with the defendant’s contention that the complainant’s viewing of an allegedly suggestive photographic array tainted the lineup identification made by the complainant four days later. The evidence adduced at the hearing reveals that the complainant was unable to positively identify the person she selected from the photographic array as one of
Although the police officer improperly testified as to the identification made by the complainant at the lineup (see, People v Johnson, 57 NY2d 969, 970; People v Larsen, 157 AD2d 672), the trial court’s immediate curative instructions were sufficient to dispel whatever prejudicial effect this testimony may have had (see, People v Jenkins, 122 AD2d 74). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.
