Opinion
2001-06682.
Decided May 17, 2004.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cooperman, J.), rendered July 10, 2001, convicting him of murder in the second degree (two counts), robbery in the first degree, and conspiracy in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Bertrand J. Kahn of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Steven Schwartz of counsel), for respondent.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15).
The defendant's arguments regarding alleged prosecutorial misconduct during summation are largely unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Dien, 77 N.Y.2d 885; People v. Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818). In any event, the comments alleged to be inflammatory and prejudicial were either fair comment on the evidence ( see People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105) or responsive to arguments presented in the defense counsel's summation ( see People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396).
The defendant contends that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at the trial. However, to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must overcome the strong presumption that the defense counsel rendered effective assistance ( see People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137; People v. Myers, 220 A.D.2d 461). After a review of the record in its entirety and without giving undue significance to retrospective analysis, we are satisfied that the defendant received the effective assistance of counsel ( see People v. Myers, supra).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are without merit.
SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, SCHMIDT and RIVERA, JJ., concur.