Opinion
April 8, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
On appeal, the defendant contends that the People failed to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence because of, inter alia, inconsistencies in the testimony of the People's witnesses. We disagree.
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). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15).
To the extent that the defendant contends that the evidence was not legally sufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that issue is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v. Logan, 74 N.Y.2d 859). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt.
Finally, we find that the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 83). Thompson, J.P., Brown, Miller and O'Brien, JJ., concur.