Opinion
April 26, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.).
The trial court properly allowed the police testimony regarding defendant's uncharged drug sales immediately preceding the charged sale, since its probative value, i.e., to provide a complete and coherent narrative of the offense, including an explanation of why the police targeted defendant (People v Grant, 181 A.D.2d 579; see, People v Rivera, 186 A.D.2d 504, 505), outweighed any prejudicial effect to defendant.
The prosecutor's summation was a fair response to defense arguments and did not exceed the broad bounds of rhetorical comment permissible in closing argument (People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396, 399). The prosecutor's comments properly reflected the proof adduced at trial (People v Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105, 109-110).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Rubin and Tom, JJ.