People v. Trotman

Apr 24, 2007
Versions:39 A.D.3d 881
832 N.Y.S.2d 818

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

To the extent that the defendant challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence, this challenge is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19-20 [1995]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Resolution of issues of credibility is primarily a matter to be determined by the factfinder, which saw and heard the witnesses, and its determination should be afforded great deference on appeal (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645 [2006]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]). Upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, supra at 643-644). Crane, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Dillon, JJ., concur.