Opinion
2006-1860 K CR.
Decided November 4, 2009.
Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County (James Burke, J.), rendered September 22, 2006. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of attempted assault in the third degree and two counts of harassment in the second degree.
ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
PRESENT: WESTON, J.P., RIOS and STEINHARDT, JJ.
Upon a review of the record, we are of the opinion that the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of attempted assault in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.00) and two counts of harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26). Moreover, 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; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342). It is well settled that the credibility of witnesses is a question of fact, and the resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded the evidence presented, is to be decided by the trier of fact, which had the opportunity to see and hear the witnesses ( see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633). The determination of the trier of fact should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record ( see People v Lane, 7 NY3d 888, 890). We find defendant's other contentions raised on appeal to be without merit or academic. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Weston, J.P., Rios and Steinhardt, JJ., concur.