Opinion
November 29, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Miller, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, there was sufficient corroboration of his accomplices' testimony tending to connect him with the commission of the crimes charged (see, CPL 60.22; People v Bretti, 68 N.Y.2d 929; People v Tillotson, 63 N.Y.2d 731; People v Glasper, 52 N.Y.2d 970; People v Burgin, 40 N.Y.2d 953; People v Dawkins, 151 A.D.2d 495). Moreover, the record establishes that the court's accomplice corroboration charge sufficiently apprised the jury of the proper standards for reviewing the relevant evidence.
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15). Resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented, are primarily questions to be determined by the jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88).
We find that the defendant's sentence was not excessive (People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Bartlett, 191 A.D.2d 574; People v Staton, 162 A.D.2d 562) or lacking in merit. Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Sullivan and Ritter, JJ., concur.