Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered February 24, 1999, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, attempted assault in the first degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing (Marrero, J.), of those branches of the defendant’s omnibus motion which were to suppress identification testimony and physical evidence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the People satisfied their burden of establishing that a pretrial showup identification was not unduly suggestive (see, People v Duuvon, 77 NY2d 541; People v Chipp, 75 NY2d 327, 335, cert denied 498 US *485833; cf., People v Ortiz, 90 NY2d 533). The People produced three witnesses who were present at the time of the procedure. Those witnesses testified that the complainant arrived about 10 minutes after the robbery and identified the defendant.
The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Smith, 240 AD2d 600). Bracken, Acting P. J., O’Brien, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.