The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence ( People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). The issues raised by defendant concerning purported inconsistencies in the testimony of the accomplice witnesses were properly placed before the jury and we find no reason to disturb its determination.
While it may have been error for the trial court to have admitted the prior consistent statements of two of the testifying accomplices, it was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt, including substantial nonaccomplice testimony ( People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230). We have considered defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit.
Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.