Opinion
February 3, 1989
Appeal from the Onondaga County Court, Cunningham, J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Denman, Boomer, Balio and Lawton JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the court's charge on reasonable doubt deprived him of a fair trial. From a review of the whole charge, we conclude that the court's charge on reasonable doubt was sufficient because the jury would gather from it the correct rule to apply in arriving at its verdict (People v Canty, 60 N.Y.2d 830, 832). However, we reiterate our strong disapproval of use of the phrases "reasonable degree of certainty" and "good, sound, substantial reasons" when describing proof beyond a reasonable doubt (People v Price, 144 A.D.2d 1013; People v Hewlett, 133 A.D.2d 417; People v Mitchell, 124 A.D.2d 977).
Defendant also contends that the verdict was against the weight of evidence. In this regard, it is asserted that the jury erred in crediting the victim's testimony, rather than defendant's. The credibility of the witnesses was a matter for determination by the trier of fact and we see no basis to substitute our judgment for that of the jury (People v Peoples, 130 A.D.2d 954, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 715).
We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.