Opinion
Submitted November 2, 2000.
November 28, 2000.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered July 13, 1998, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, robbery in the third degree, and petit larceny, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Leon H. Tracy, Forest Hills, N.Y., for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Michelle L. Blackman of counsel), for respondent.
Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, FRED T. SANTUCCI, LEO F. McGINITY, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his conviction is not supported by legally sufficient evidence because the complainant's testimony was inconsistent and incredible is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 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). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.