Opinion
October 20, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel P. FitzGerald, J.).
Defendant's claim that he was denied effective assistance of counsel is without merit, it clearly having been counsel's strategy to bring out certain damaging information on the direct examination of defendant's witness in order to minimize the potential impact of cross-examination. Such unsuccessful trial tactics do not automatically indicate ineffectiveness (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146). The prosecutor's unobjected to comments on summation were within the broad bounds of rhetorical comment permissible in closing argument (see, People v Bobbett, 170 A.D.2d 237, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 903), and, in context, were a fair response to defendant's summation attacking the credibility of the People's witness (see, People v Marks, 6 N.Y.2d 67, cert denied 362 U.S. 912).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.