People v. Jenkins ( 1995 )

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J.), rendered May 16, 1994, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his contention that the People failed to prove his identity as the perpetrator beyond a reasonable doubt since he did not raise this issue on his motion for a trial order of dismissal (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245; see also, People v White, 192 AD2d 736; People v Johnson, 185 AD2d 247; People v Rios, 180 AD2d 696). In any event, viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant’s identity as the individual who robbed the complainant. 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 NY 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 AD2d 86, 88). Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Joy, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.