Opinion
May 23, 1988
Appeal from the County Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence adduced at the trial in a light most favorable to the People (People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the conviction. The complainant testified that the defendant handcuffed him and stole a radio and cash from his apartment. Although the defendant contended that the radio rightfully belonged to him, we have repeatedly held that the "claim of right" defense under Penal Law § 155.15 (1) is not available in robbery prosecutions (see, People v Reid, 69 N.Y.2d 469; People v Valente, 129 A.D.2d 824; People v Hodges, 113 A.D.2d 514, lv denied 67 N.Y.2d 884, 68 N.Y.2d 813; People v Coates, 64 A.D.2d 1).
Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15). The defendant did not deny that he forcibly took the radio from the complainant's apartment, although he denied taking the cash. 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, 94; People v Sabatini, 130 A.D.2d 524). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal (see, People v Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88). Eiber, J.P., Kooper, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.