Opinion
October 16, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cohen, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The issue of the legal sufficiency of the evidence is not preserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). 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 it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( see, People v. Smith, 23 N.Y.2d 955; People v. Diaz, 23 N.Y.2d 811; People v. Taylor, 190 A.D.2d 628). The defendant contends that the testimony of the prosecution's key witness was implausible. However, 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 was not against the weight of the evidence ( see, CPL 470.15). O'Brien, J.P., Joy, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.