in who was child’s natural father. Id. at 20-34. ¶ 6 Mother’s father, appellant Jackie Wyland, also testified on his own behalf. Wyland testified that following the birth of child, as a consequence of appellee’s late-night phone calls and threats of kidnapping, he did order appellee to not come onto his property. Id. at 44-45. Wyland also testified that while he did order appel-lee not call their residence, he never told Claar she was not allowed to see child. Id at 46-47. Wyland acknowledged appel-lee’s presence at the hospital when child was born but stated mother never told him appellee was the birth father. ¶ 7 The trial judge heard this testimony and apparently found appellee credible. We will not disturb this finding. See Luminella v. Marcocci, 814 A.2d 711 (Pa.Super.2002) (<HOLDING>). ¶ 8 “The doctrine of estoppel in paternity
holding that the postconviction court is the sole judge of the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses holding trial court is sole and exclusive judge of witnesses credibility holding that because the trial court sitting as the trier of fact conducts an evidencebalancing test from the vantage point of being best able to judge credibility of witnesses and the weight to be assigned thereto we will defer to its opinion holding that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility given to witness testimony recognizing trial courts superior vantage point in assessing credibility of witnesses