Opinion
Argued May 15, 2001
June 11, 2001
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered October 7, 1999, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Melissa S. Horlick of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Ellen C. Abbot, and Cornelius J. Redmond of counsel), for respondent.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
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. Although there were some inconsistencies in the arresting officer's testimony, 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 trier of fact, 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 of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant's claim that the Supreme Court violated his First Amendment right to freely exercise his religion is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Cooper, 234 A.D.2d 77).