Opinion
Submitted October 25, 2001.
November 19, 2001.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), rendered December 11, 2000, convicting him of robbery in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Sonia Mikolic-Torreira of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Phyllis Mintz of counsel; Daniel Yunger on the brief), for respondent.
Before: GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, NANCY E. SMITH, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt is unpreserved for appellate review since he did not specify this ground in his motion to dismiss at trial (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10; 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. Moreover, 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. Garafalo, 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). The evidence of the defendant's agitated and threatening words and conduct during the incident sufficed to establish a threat of immediate use of physical force (see, CPL 160.00; People v. Woods, 41 N.Y.2d 279; People v. Fore, 231 A.D.2d 590; People v. Zagorski, 135 A.D.2d 594).
KRAUSMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, SMITH and CRANE, JJ., concur.