Opinion
June 9, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Aiello, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant maintains that the jury's rejection of his defense of justification was against the weight of the evidence. This contention is without merit. 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 (see, People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 96; People v. Sneed, 233 A.D.2d 410; People v. Lemaire, 187 A.D.2d 532, 533). Its determination should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see, People v. Sneed, supra; People v Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisifed that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
There is no merit to the defendant's further contention that the court improperly adjudicated him a second violent felony offender on the ground that the predicate felony was based upon a coerced plea of guilty. It was not coercive for the court to have remarked in the prior case that if the defendant were to be convicted after trial, it would impose a sentence close to the maximum allowable under the law (see, People v. Jones, 232 A.D.2d 505; People v. Cornelio, 227 A.D.2d 248; People v. Stephens, 188 A.D.2d 345, 346).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 85-86).
The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Smith, 222 A.D.2d 535), and, in any event, is without merit.
Pizzuto, J.P., Santucci, Friedmann and Luciano, JJ., concur.