Opinion
Submitted December 10, 1999
January 31, 2000
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schneier, J.), rendered May 28, 1997, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
M. Sue Wycoff, New York, N.Y. (Betsy A. Hutchings of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Roseann B. MacKechnie, Jodi L. Mandel, and Valerie A. DePalma of counsel), for respondent.
LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., WILLIAM C. THOMPSON, THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defendant contends that the testimony of a prosecution witness was inconsistent and therefore should not have been believed by the jury. However, 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, 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 A.D.2d 86, 88 ). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15[5]).
The defendant was not prejudiced by the codefendant's admission of a prior felony conviction during cross examination (see,People v. Fontanez, 247 A.D.2d 260 ).
BRACKEN, J.P., THOMPSON, SULLIVAN, and KRAUSMAN, JJ., concur.