PEOPLE v. SANDERS (1999)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J., at trial;  Feldman, J., at sentence), rendered February 4, 1994, convicting him of murder in the second degree and burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

 The defendant contends that the verdict of guilt is against the weight of the evidence because the testimony of the People's identification witnesses was internally inconsistent and inherently incredible.   We disagree.   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, 68 N.E. 112).   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, 353 N.Y.S.2d 500).   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] ).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not deprived of his right to the effective assistance of counsel.   The evidence, the law, and the circumstances of the case, viewed as a whole as of the time of the representation, reveal that the defense counsel provided meaningful representation (see, People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397, 404, 633 N.Y.S.2d 270, 657 N.E.2d 265;  People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).

The defendant's sentence is not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.