Opinion
May 14, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Beisner, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15). The 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 (People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94).
Furthermore, where, as here, the court's findings are supported by the evidence and a review of the record indicates that the Judge made every effort to be fair, the claim of the Trial Judge's bias is without merit (see, Bubbins v. Bubbins, 114 A.D.2d 346; United States v. Agilar, 779 F.2d 123, cert denied 475 U.S. 1068). The record further indicates that the Judge was justified in disciplining the defendant for his tardiness and he conducted the trial in a fair and objective manner.
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions, including his claim that the sentence imposed was excessive, and find them to be without merit. Bracken, J.P., Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.