
    Darryl PLUNKETT, Petitioner-Appellant, v. John P. KEANE, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 03-2458.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Oct. 8, 2004.
    Vida M. Alvy, Alvy & Jacobson, New York, NY, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    Solomon Neubort, Assistant District Attorney (Leonard Joblove and Ann Bordley), for Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney of King’s County, Brooklyn, NY, for Respondent-Appellee, of counsel.
    Present: MESKILL, MINER, and KATZMANN, Circuit Judges.
   SUMMARY ORDER

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be and hereby is AFFIRMED.

The parties’ familiarity with the facts is assumed. We conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that the Appellant was not substantially prejudiced by any delay in transmitting the notes of Detective Chmil’s interview with Armstead.

Moreover Appellant has not established a Rosario violation as to the claims regarding Hamilton’s identification. See People v. Rosario, 9 N.Y.2d 286, 213 N.Y.S.2d 448, 173 N.E.2d 881 (1961). Appellant did not establish before the district court that records of Hamilton’s identification exist.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.  