Opinion
March 6, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (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, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded 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). Its determination is entitled to great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86). 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).
The initial stop of the defendant by police officers was properly effected as it was based on a reasonable suspicion that the defendant had committed a crime (see, CPL 140.50; People v. Hollman, 79 N.Y.2d 181). The showup identification, which took place in close spatial and temporal proximity to the commission of the crime was also proper (see, People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541). The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Balletta, J.P., O'Brien, Thompson and Ritter, JJ., concur.