Court Opinion

ID: 5989914
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-13 08:55:17.379175+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:49:48.890991
License: Public Domain

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Cirigliano, J.), rendered February 8, 1993, 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, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to establish his guilt of the crimes of which he was convicted is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; 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 is legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, inconsistencies in the testimony of the witnesses and 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; People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05 [2]) or without merit. Joy, J. P., Friedmann, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.