Opinion
March 27, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Robinson, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
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. 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 (CPL 470.15).
The factual showing at the Hinton hearing (see, People v Hinton, 31 N.Y.2d 71, cert denied 410 U.S. 911), was sufficient to support closure of the courtroom during the undercover officer's testimony (see, People v. Martinez, 82 N.Y.2d 436). It was established that the undercover officer continued to work as an undercover officer, that he was presently involved in several ongoing investigations, including some that involved the area where the defendant was arrested, and that the integrity of those operations as well as his own personal safety would be compromised if his identity were to become public (see, People v Martinez, supra; People v. Jones, 47 N.Y.2d 409, 414-415, cert denied 444 U.S. 946).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J.P., Altman, Hart and Goldstein, JJ., concur.