Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Angel Perez, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1995-03-27
Citations: 213 A.D.2d 682
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Angel Perez, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 213
Pages: 682–683

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Angel Perez, Appellant.
[624 NYS2d 199]

Opinion:
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), rendered September 16, 1992, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of that branch of the defendant's omnibus motion which was to suppress statements he made to law enforcement authorities.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that the People disproved the defense of justification beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Reed, 40 NY2d 204). At trial, the defendant contended that the victim had attacked him with a knife and then fell on the knife himself. However, the People presented testimony that the victim merely struck the defendant with his bare hands. An expert also testified that the victim's injuries were inconsistent with his falling on the knife. Moreover, the defendant admitted that he stabbed the victim twice more as the victim attempted to retreat to his room. Although the defendant claims that the People's eyewitness was an admitted liar and, therefore, should not have been believed, resolution of issues of credibilty, 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 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 (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Copertino, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Friedmann, JJ., concur.