Opinion
June 5, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Demakos, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
On the instant appeal, the defendant argues that several comments by the prosecutor, during his summation, deprived him of a fair trial.
We disagree.
Initially, we note that the comments of the prosecutor, complained of by the defendant on appeal, were not objected to at trial. Accordingly, this issue was not preserved for appellate review (People v. Dordal, 55 N.Y.2d 954). In any event, a review of the record indicates that the complained of remarks were justified either as fair comment on the evidence adduced at trial or as a fair response to defense counsel's remarks in summation wherein one of the victims was characterized as "high" and "drunk" and the other was essentially characterized as a liar (People v. Anthony, 24 N.Y.2d 696, 703; People v. Busjit, 121 A.D.2d 555). Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.