We agree with defendant that several of the prosecutor's remarks on summation were inflammatory and improperly denigrated the defense, and that an improper comment was made regarding the prospect of incarceration ( see, People v. Ellis 188 A.D.2d 1043, 1044, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 970; People v. Friedt, 280 App. Div. 836). Immediately following the summation, however, the court gave adequate curative instructions. We conclude that the prosecutor's comments on summation were not so egregious that defendant was deprived of a fair trial and that the court's curative instructions erased any potential prejudice to defendant ( see, People v. Coad, 237 A.D.2d 968; People v. Plant, 138 A.D.2d 968, lv denied 71 N.Y.2d 1031). In view of the serious nature of these crimes and defendant's criminal history, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

We agree with defendant that several of the prosecutor's remarks on summation were inflammatory and improperly denigrated the defense, and that an improper comment was made regarding the prospect of incarceration (see, People v. Ellis, 188 A.D.2d 1043, 1044, 592 N.Y.S.2d 200, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 970, 598 N.Y.S.2d 771, 615 N.E.2d 228; People v. Friedt, 280 A.D. 836, 113 N.Y.S.2d 889). Immediately following the summation, however, the court gave adequate curative instructions. We conclude that the prosecutor's comments on summation were not so egregious that defendant was deprived of a fair trial and that the court's curative instructions erased any potential prejudice to defendant (see, People v. Coad, 237 A.D.2d 968, 656 N.Y.S.2d 984; People v. Plant, 138 A.D.2d 968, 526 N.Y.S.2d 300, lv. denied 71 N.Y.2d 1031, 530 N.Y.S.2d 566, 526 N.E.2d 59).         In view of the serious nature of these crimes and defendant's criminal history, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.