DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The appellant contends that the Family Court's determination was against the weight of the evidence. Since the Family Court saw and heard the testimony of all of the witnesses, its assessment of their credibility is entitled to great weight on appeal, and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record ( see Matter of Tyrell A., 249 A.D.2d 467, 468; Matter of Nnennya P., 247 A.D.2d 476, 477). When a witness positively identifies a person as the perpetrator of a crime, the weight of the evidence of identification is a question primarily for the factfinder, unless it is incredible as a matter of law ( cf. People v. Cuffie, 163 A.D.2d 485, 486; see Matter of Ryan W., 143 A.D.2d 435, 436). The fact that the complainant overestimated the height of the appellant does not render his testimony incredible as a matter of law ( see People v. Tucker, 185 A.D.2d 908, 909) and the court's determination was not against the weight of the evidence ( see Matter of Felix M., 308 A.D.2d 586, lv denied N.Y.2d [Dec. 23, 2003]; cf. CPL 470.15; Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493, 498; Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129, 135).
The appellant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review.
FLORIO, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.