Opinion
2002-01394
Submitted October 16, 2003.
November 17, 2003.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Latella, J.), rendered January 29, 2002, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Barbara Lerner of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Sharon Y. Brodt, and Anjanette Cabrera of counsel), for respondent.
Before: NANCY E. SMITH, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, LEO F. McGINITY, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was prejudiced by certain remarks of the prosecutor during summation is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v. Heide, 84 N.Y.2d 943; People v. Hermonstyne, 273 A.D.2d 408). In any event, the majority of the prosecutor's remarks constituted fair comment on the evidence and were responsive to arguments and issues raised by the defense ( see People v. Silva, 306 A.D.2d 424; see generally People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105). To the extent that any of the prosecutor's comments constituted error, the Supreme Court acted promptly to remove any prejudicial effect ( see People v. Ashwal, supra; People v. Hermonstyne, supra). Moreover, any errors which may have occurred during the prosecutor's summation were harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt ( see People v. Rodriquez, 100 N.Y.2d 30; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
SMITH, J.P., KRAUSMAN, McGINITY and RIVERA, JJ., concur.