Court Opinion

ID: 5677445
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 14:48:01.765564+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:39:48.545606
License: Public Domain

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brennan, J.), rendered August 5, 2002, convicting him of assault in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that he physically injured the victim to sustain his conviction of assault in the third degree (see Penal Law § 120.00 [1]). This challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review since the defendant did not raise this issue at trial (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245 [1989]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), 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 *428weight 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 [1903]). 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 [1974]). 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]). Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Mastro and Fisher, JJ., concur.