Opinion
2000-01500
Submitted October 1, 2002.
October 28, 2002.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Perone, J.), rendered January 20, 2000, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and reckless endangerment in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Arza Feldman, Hauppauge, N.Y., for appellant.
Jeanine Pirro, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Sanjay L. Bhatt and Valerie A. Livingston of counsel), for respondent.
Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that the prosecutor engaged in misconduct during cross-examination is unpreserved for appellate review since the defendant made only general objections, did not request curative instructions when one objection was sustained, and did not move for a mistrial based upon the ground, asserted on appeal, that the trial court precluded him from making specific objections during trial (see People v. Hunte, 276 A.D.2d 717). In any event, the allegedly improper conduct did not constitute reversible error (see People v. Jones, 275 A.D.2d 330).
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10; People v. Williams, 247 A.D.2d 416; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, 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. Moreover, 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 of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15).
FLORIO, J.P., FRIEDMANN, ADAMS and CRANE, JJ., concur.