Opinion
November 24, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kooper, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the testimony of an eyewitness to the crime was not credible and that therefore his guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. We reject this contention. Credibility is a matter to be determined by the trier of the facts (People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 U.S. 932; People v Parks, 41 N.Y.2d 36, 47). Our review of the record leads us to conclude that the evidence adduced at the trial was sufficient in quantity and quality to support the verdict (see, People v Malizia, supra; cf. People v Restrepo, 93 A.D.2d 825; People v Fillion, 66 A.D.2d 932).
We reject the defendant's contention that two instances of prosecutorial misconduct during the summation denied him a fair trial (see, People v Boute, 111 A.D.2d 398). Mangano, J.P., Weinstein, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.