Opinion
February 26, 1996
Appeal from the Family Court, Suffolk County (Pach, J.).
Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency (cf., People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
We reject the appellant's contention that the Family Court did not accord the proper weight to the evidence that was presented at the fact-finding hearing. There was some evidence that might have contradicted the complainant's testimony about what she could or could not see from a girls' bathroom in the school where the attack occurred and what she did after she identified the appellant in the school cafeteria. There was also some evidence that impeached the complainant's testimony about the location of the attack and whether or not others were present at that location. However, resolution of issues of credibility and the weight to be accorded to the evidence presented are primarily questions to be determined by the trier-of-fact, which saw and heard the witnesses (cf., People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless it is clearly unsupported by the record (see, Matter of Judah J., 182 A.D.2d 621; cf., People v Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power we are satisfied that the findings of fact are not against the weight of the evidence (cf., People v. Hobot, 200 A.D.2d 586, affd 84 N.Y.2d 1021; see, Matter of Kyle O., 205 A.D.2d 541). O'Brien, J.P., Sullivan, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.