Opinion
June 22, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cacciabaudo, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his convictions is not preserved for appellate review (see, 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. The complainant testified, inter alia, that in the early morning hours of December 15, 1988, the defendant, aided by another, entered her cab, and, while the dome light was on, took her pocketbook at gunpoint, and hit her over the head with the butt of the gun. Although there were some minor inconsistencies in the complainant's descriptions to the police with respect to the defendant's appearance, resolutions of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded 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). 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).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contention that the lineups conducted on January 5, 1989, were unduly suggestive and find it to be without merit (see, People v. Johnson, 172 A.D.2d 774; People v. Wiley, 137 A.D.2d 735). Mangano, P.J., Harwood, Balletta and Eiber, JJ., concur.