Opinion
April 3, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Egitto, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The prosecutor acted within his discretion in declining to present an eyewitness to the crime to the Grand Jury because he reasonably believed that the witness would perjure himself (see generally, People v Lancaster, 69 N.Y.2d 20, cert denied 480 U.S. 922; People v Perry, 187 A.D.2d 678; People v Kaba, 177 A.D.2d 506). In any event, any defect in the Grand Jury presentation was cured when the witness testified at trial on behalf of the defendant (see, People v Perry, supra; People v Gilliam, 172 A.D.2d 1037).
The hearing court properly denied the branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony. The defendant failed to show a substantial likelihood of misidentification with respect to the photographic and lineup identification procedures (see generally, People v Adams, 53 N.Y.2d 241; People v Smoot, 209 A.D.2d 731; People v Deye, 192 A.D.2d 547).
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). 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 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). The jury's determination in this case is supported by the record.
We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find that they are without merit or that they do not warrant reversal. Bracken, J.P., Pizzuto, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.