Opinion
April 24, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that reversible error occurred due to the prosecutor's remarks during summation is unpreserved for appellate review since the defendant failed to object to the remarks which he now challenges on appeal (see, CPL 470.05 ; People v Balls, 69 N.Y.2d 641). In any event, the remarks were either a fair comment on the evidence, a fair response to defense counsel's summation, or were not so prejudicial as to warrant reversal in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
Further, the defendant's sentence is not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Balletta, J.P., Ritter, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.