People v David Alonzie

People v Alonzie 2006 NY Slip Op 05026 [30 AD3d 608] Decided on June 20, 2006 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on June 20, 2006
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
STEPHEN G. CRANE, J.P.
DAVID S. RITTER
GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN
PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.
2005-00413 DECISION & ORDER

[*1]The People, etc., respondent,

v

David Alonzie, appellant. (Ind. No. 1021/03)




Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Barbara Lerner of counsel),
for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John
M. Castellano, Ellen C. Abbot, and
Ellen B. Tobin of counsel), for
respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Aloise, J.), rendered January 4, 2005, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v Owens, 184 AD2d 533, 534; People v Williams, 118 AD2d 609). 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 trier of fact, 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 was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5]; People v Mustafa, 132 AD2d 628, 629). [*2]
CRANE, J.P., RITTER, KRAUSMAN and SKELOS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

James Edward Pelzer

Clerk of the Court