Opinion
(Ind. No. 3705/96)
Submitted September 14, 2001.
October 9, 2001.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.), rendered March 14, 2000, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (De Nice Powell of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Kristen Marcelle of counsel), for respondent.
Before: GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN and ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his confrontation clause rights were violated is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Fleming, 70 N.Y.2d 947; People v. Hughes, 251 A.D.2d 513). In any event, the infringement upon the defendant's confrontation clause rights was minimal (see, People v. Cintron, 75 N.Y.2d 249; cf., LaRocca v. Lane, 37 N.Y.2d 575, cert denied 424 U.S. 968).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he received the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137). Moreover, only one of the defendant's claimed summation comment errors was preserved for appellate review. The failure to timely object renders the remaining stated claims of error unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Rivera, 73 N.Y.2d 941; People v. Stokes, 282 A.D.2d 553, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 908; People v. Robinson, 281 A.D.2d 564, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 866; People v. Sticatto, 278 A.D.2d 345). In any event, the defendant's claim that improper remarks made by the prosecutor during summation require reversal is without merit. The prosecutor's remarks either constituted fair response to comments made during the defense counsel's summation (see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396), fair comment on the evidence (see, People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105), or were harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230), which included both his written and videotaped statements.
KRAUSMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, FRIEDMANN and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.