Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Nassau County, First District (David A. Gross, J.), rendered July 27, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.

Judgment of conviction affirmed.

Upon a review of the record, we are of the opinion that the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt of resisting arrest (Penal Law § 205.30) and disorderly conduct (Penal Law § 240.20 [1]). Defendant's conduct, together with the public nature thereof, was sufficient to establish the elements of the disorderly conduct charge. Further, in light of defendant's actions when the police officers were attempting to place him under arrest and the fact that the arrest was clearly authorized, his guilt of resisting arrest was established.

Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]). It is well settled that the credibility of witnesses is a question of fact, and the resolution of issues of credibility, as well as the weight to be accorded the evidence presented, is to be decided by the trier of fact, who had the opportunity to see and hear the witnesses (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). The determination of the trier of fact should be accorded great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless clearly unsupported by the record (see People v Garafolo, 44 AD2d 86, 88 [1974]).

We find defendant's other contentions raised on appeal to be without merit.

In view of the foregoing, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

McCabe, J.P., Tanenbaum and Scheinkman, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: April 21, 2008