DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is not preserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Grogan, 192 A.D.2d 719). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to permit a rational trier of fact to conclude that the defendant attempted to stab one of the complainants with a knife during a barroom fight, and that he was found in possession of that knife ( see People v. Jenkins, 186 A.D.2d 759; People v. Limpert, 186 A.D.2d 1005).
The claimed inconsistencies in the testimony of the eyewitnesses were minor and fully explored at trial ( see People v. Tucker, 298 A.D.2d 415; People v. DuPont, 283 A.D.2d 587). 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 N.Y. 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 A.D.2d 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).
SANTUCCI, J.P., FLORIO, SCHMIDT and MASTRO, JJ., concur.