Opinion
Argued May 1, 2001.
May 21, 2001.
Daniel L. Greenberg, New York, N.Y. (Lorca Morello of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Linda Breen of counsel), for respondent.
Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., DANIEL F. LUCIANO, HOWARD MILLER and NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.), rendered September 10, 1998, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's general motion for a trial order of dismissal did not preserve for appellate review his present challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Brown, 270 A.D.2d 496; People v. Banks, 258 A.D.2d 525, 526). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant also failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that certain comments in the prosecutor's summation constituted reversible error (see, People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19; People v. Heide, 84 N.Y.2d 943, 944; People v. Rosario, 195 A.D.2d 577). In any event, many if not all of the challenged comments were a fair response to defense counsel's summation (see, People v. Halm, 81 N.Y.2d 819, 821; People v. Colon, 122 A.D.2d 151). To the extent that there may have been error, it was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 241-242).
ALTMAN, J.P., LUCIANO, H. MILLER and SMITH, JJ., concur.