DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the fingerprint evidence was insufficient to prove that he was one of the perpetrators who robbed the gas station and assaulted the complainant is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Gerofsky, 244 A.D.2d 569 ; see also, People v. Flores, 84 N.Y.2d 957, 960 ). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620 ), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, resolution of the 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 evidence (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 is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15[5]).
BRACKEN, J.P., JOY, GOLDSTEIN, and LUCIANO, JJ., concur.