Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the arresting officers tailored their testimony at the suppression hearing in order to establish a sufficient factual predicate for his arrest, and that the hearing court erred in crediting their testimony. Resolution of 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 who saw and heard the witnesses (see, People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94). The hearing court's determination must be accorded 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). Although the testimony of the officers contains factual inconsistencies, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the findings of the hearing court were not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Ward, 175 A.D.2d 819). Here, the evidence that was credited by the hearing court was sufficient to establish probable cause for the defendant's arrest (see, People v. McRay, 51 N.Y.2d 594).
The defendant's sentence was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816) and we find no circumstances warranting a reduction (People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 86). Sullivan, J.P., Balletta, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.