Opinion
October 6, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Angela Mazzarelli, J.).
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, as we must, and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference (see, People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), we find that the evidence was sufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict finding the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of robbery in the third degree. Further, upon an independent review of the facts, we find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). The issues raised by defendant concerning the credibility of prosecution witnesses, including those that arose from eyewitness identification testimony of the complainant and a "Good Samaritan" bystander, were properly placed before the jury and we find no reason on the record before us to disturb its determination.
The "over-all effect of the prosecutor's summation was within the range of acceptability" (People v. D'Alessandro, 184 A.D.2d 114, 119, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 884) and reversal is not warranted merely because certain remarks "would have been better left unsaid" (People v. Davis, 188 A.D.2d 420, 421, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 884).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Rosenberger, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.