Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
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. Penetration of the vulva or labia constitutes sexual intercourse even though the victim's hymen remains intact and there is no penetration into the vaginal canal ( see, People v. Groff, 71 N.Y.2d 101; People v. Berardicurti, 167 A.D.2d 840). Here, the trial testimony clearly established that, at the very least, the defendant's penis penetrated the complainant's vulva. Additionally, the complainant's testimony established the element of forcible compulsion ( see, People v. Hodges, 204 A.D.2d 739; People v. Solorzano, 163 A.D.2d 434). The fact that the complainant did not suffer any physical injuries as a result of the sexual attack does not render the verdict against the weight of the evidence ( see, People v. Hodges, supra; People v. Gonzalez, 136 A.D.2d 735).
Moreover, the inconsistencies between the complainant's out-of-court statements and her trial testimony merely created a credibility issue which the jury resolved in the People's favor ( see, People v. Collins, 188 A.D.2d 608, 609).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.