Opinion
May 8, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that the People failed to establish his knowledge of the weight of the cocaine found in his possession (see, People v Hill, 85 N.Y.2d 256; People v Bynum, 70 N.Y.2d 858; People v Bright, 210 A.D.2d 244; People v Okehoffurum, 201 A.D.2d 508; see also, People v Douglas, 205 A.D.2d 280). With respect to the remaining elements of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, 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.
The defendant's assertions that the testimony of the witnesses failed to prove that he possessed 247 vials of cocaine raise an issue of credibility. 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). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant's sentence is neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05), or without merit. Thompson, J.P., Santucci, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.