Court Opinion

ID: 6041115
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-13 13:50:10.868922+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:52:14.196487
License: Public Domain

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Vaughn, J.), rendered September 6, 1996, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (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 jury, which saw and heard the witnesses (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]).
*507The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Bracken, J. P., Krausman, McGinity and Schmidt, JJ., concur.