Court Opinion

ID: 5996346
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-13 09:30:11.882045+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:50:06.169533
License: Public Domain

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.), rendered January 12, 1994, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review the denial, after a hearing, of the branch of the defendant’s omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly declined to suppress the complainant’s out-of-court identification of the defendant since the *459complainant’s viewing of the defendant at the police station was merely confirmatory (see, People v Griffin, 161 AD2d 799).
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. The defendant’s contention that the complainant should not have been believed by the jury is without merit. Resolution of issues of credibility 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, 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 is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]) or without merit. Thompson, J. P., Ritter, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.