Opinion
April 21, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Alvin Schlesinger, J.).
The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues relating to the reliability of identification testimony were properly presented to the jury, and we see no reason to disturb its findings ( see, People v. Gaimarz, 176 N.Y. 84, 94).
Since defendant made no objection, or only a generalized objection, his present challenges to the prosecutor's summation are unpreserved, and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review defendant's claims, we would find that the challenged remarks were fair comment. Although defendant's cross-examination and summation primarily focused on the accuracy of the identification, it nevertheless challenged the complainant's veracity as well, and thus, the prosecutor's brief discussion of credibility issues was appropriate ( People v. Harvey, 184 A.D.2d 311, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 904).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Rubin and Williams, JJ.