Opinion
February 3, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Sherman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
On appeal the defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial by testimony regarding the uncharged crime of resisting arrest and by prosecutorial misconduct during summation. We do not agree. Any prejudice arising from the arresting officer's testimony regarding the uncharged crime of resisting arrest was eliminated when the court ultimately sustained defense counsel's objection to that testimony and gave curative instructions to the jury (see, People v. Santiago, 52 N.Y.2d 865). Similarly, any prejudice caused by the prosecutor's conduct in banging a hammer on a table during summation was eliminated when the court sustained defense counsel's objection thereto (see, People v. Canada, 157 A.D.2d 793). In any event, in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, any error was harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 305; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80; People v Bonaventura, 168 A.D.2d 626). Balletta, J.P., Miller, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.