Opinion
June 23, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
The evidence of the defendant's guilt, including his identity, was overwhelming since he was apprehended immediately following the robbery after only a short chase by the police who chanced upon the robbery while it was in progress. The complainant had adequate opportunity to observe the perpetrators during the robbery and, before any potential for suggestiveness could arise, stated that he felt "reasonably certain" that the individuals that the police caught a minute later were among the youths who had robbed him.
The prosecutor's remark to the jurors in summation concerning reasonable doubt might best have been left to the court's charge (see, People v. Robinson, 83 A.D.2d 887; People v. Boulware, 29 N.Y.2d 135, rearg denied 29 N.Y.2d 749). However, the remark had no prejudicial effect (compare, People v. Feldman, 296 N.Y. 127; and People v. Robinson, supra; with 1 CJI [NY] 620 p 249), and was, in any case, harmless in light of the overwhelming proof of guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230). Gibbons, J.P., Brown, Weinstein and Kooper, JJ., concur.