Opinion
April 8, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bianchi, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the People failed to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt inasmuch as the testimony of the victim was allegedly inconsistent, contradictory and incredible. However, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Resolution of issues of credibility, including the credibility of the victim, 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).
The alleged instances of prosecutorial misconduct during the cross-examination of the defendant, who testified on his own behalf, are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Watts, 154 A.D.2d 723, 724; People v. Fisher, 148 A.D.2d 628, 629). The allegedly improper comments made by the prosecutor during summation are also unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v. Winfield, 154 A.D.2d 725; People v. Fisher, supra; People v. Flores, 139 A.D.2d 525, 526). In any event, the defendant's contentions are without merit. Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Balletta and Ritter, JJ., concur.