Opinion
Submitted September 25, 2001.
October 15, 2001.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (DeRiggi, J.), rendered April 18, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.
Leon H. Tracy, Jericho, N.Y., for appellant.
Denis Dillon, District Attorney, Mineola, N Y (Bruce E. Whitney and Andrea M. DiGregorio of counsel), for respondent.
Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, ANITA R. FLORIO, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The testimony regarding the defendant's membership in a gang was properly admitted to establish a motive and because it was inextricably interwoven into the narrative of events (see, People v. Vails, 43 N.Y.2d 364; People v. Pacheco, 265 A.D.2d 347; People v. Bernard, 224 A.D.2d 192).
Given that the showup identification by the complainant occurred in close proximity to the time and location of the incident, it was not unduly suggestive (see, People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541; People v. Smith, 271 A.D.2d 332; People v. Rodriguez, 259 A.D.2d 638; People v. Tarangelo, 258 A.D.2d 305; People v. Grassia, 195 A.D.2d 607).
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. Moreover, resolution 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, 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 is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
RITTER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, FLORIO and TOWNES, JJ., concur.