Opinion
December 13, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contentions with regard to the legal sufficiency of the evidence are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Bynum, 70 N.Y.2d 858; People v Torres, 151 A.D.2d 524; People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt. While the defendant bases his arguments largely on the credibility of the eyewitnesses to the crime, it is well-settled that 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 trier of fact, 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 (see, CPL 470.15). Sullivan, J.P., O'Brien, Ritter and Joy, JJ., concur.