Case Name: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Victor Puello, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2002-11-04
Citations: 299 A.D.2d 372
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Victor Puello, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 299
Pages: 372–373

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Victor Puello, Appellant.
[749 NYS2d 165]

Opinion:
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Braun, J.), rendered May 4, 2001, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the fourth degree and unauthorized use of a vehicle in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the 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. Specifically, the defendant was positively identified by the two arresting police officers as the driver of the stolen vehicle.
Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded 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]). Altman, J.P., Goldstein, McGinity and Mastro, JJ., concur.