Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim regarding the legal sufficiency of the evidence was not preserved for appellate review by either the general motion to dismiss (see People v Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10; People v Wells, 272 A.D.2d 562, People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245), or the posttrial motion to set aside the verdict (see People v Betts, 292 A.D.2d 539, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 649; People v Adams, 281 A.D.2d 486, 487). 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 Ruiz, 211 A.D.2d 829, 830). Moreover, 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, 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 record (see People v Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86). 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 ). Under the circumstances, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.