Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Orlando Pena, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1997-08-25
Citations: 242 A.D.2d 391
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Orlando Pena, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 242
Pages: 391–391

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Orlando Pena, Appellant.
[661 NYS2d 994]

Opinion:
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldman, J., at trial; Gary, J., at sentence), rendered May 5, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 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 NY 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 AD2d 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 (CPL 470.15 [5]). Miller, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.