Opinion
April 23, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Torres, J.).
Defendant's challenges to the People's summation are not preserved for appellate review ( see, People v. Balls, 69 N.Y.2d 641; People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023; People v. Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review them, we would find the challenged statements did not convey to the jury that defendant had a duty to testify and were responsive to the evidence and to defense counsel's summation ( see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; People v. Overlee, 236 A.D.2d 133). The challenged portion of the court's charge defining reasonable doubt did not impose an obligation on the jury to articulate a basis for such doubt ( see, People v. Brin, 190 A.D.2d 512, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 751). The charge, when viewed as a whole, conveyed the proper legal standards ( People v. Fields, 87 N.Y.2d 821; see also, People v. Cubino, 88 N.Y.2d 998).
Concur — Lerner, P.J., Nardelli, Wallach, Williams and Saxe, JJ.