ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that he intended to kill the complainant is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19; People v. Carolan, 265 A.D.2d 337; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245), as he failed to specifically raise this issue in either of his motions for a trial order of dismissal (see People v. Williams, 247 A.D.2d 416, 417). 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 establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v. Flores, 284 A.D.2d 230; People v. Corrado, 256 A.D.2d 586; People v. Francis, 209 A.D.2d 539, 540). Moreover, resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded to the evidence 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 given 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).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.