Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Griffin, J.), rendered December 20, 2012, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]; see also People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). The fact that the defendant was acquitted on the counts of grand larceny in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 155.30 [1]) and petit larceny (Penal Law § 155.25) did not undermine the weight of the evidence supporting the jury’s verdict convicting the defendant of burglary in the second degree (Penal Law § 140.25 [2]) and criminal mischief in the fourth degree (Penal Law § 145.00 [1]; People v Rayam, 94 NY2d 557, 563 [2000]). As part of our review of the weight of the evidence, we do not “assume the basis for any implied inconsistencies in mixed jury verdicts” (People v Rayam, 94 NY2d at 563). Upon reviewing the record, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). Rivera, J.P., Balkin, Duffy and LaSalle, JJ., concur.