Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
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. The codefendant's testimony was sufficiently corroborated by independent evidence connecting the defendant to the crime ( see CPL 60.22; People v Caban, 5 NY3d 143; People v Breland, 83 NY2d 286; People v Goodson, 35 AD3d 760 [2006]).
Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility is primarily a matter to be determined by the fact-finder, which saw and heard the witnesses, and its determination should be accorded great deference on appeal ( see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410, cert denied 542 US 946). Upon the exercise of our factual review power ( see CPL 470.15), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v Romero, supra).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.