Opinion
2000-02589
Submitted May 23, 2003.
June 16, 2003.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered March 9, 2000, as amended March 16, 2000, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Tonya Plank of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Victor Barall, Benjamin Schneider, and Matthew S. Greenberg of counsel), for respondent.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, THOMAS A. ADAMS, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.
The defendant's challenges to various remarks made by the prosecutor during summation are unpreserved for appellate review, as the defendant failed to make a timely objection, or alert the court to the basis for the challenge to the remark (see CPL 470.05; People v. Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818, People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, the prosecutor's comments "were either within the bounds of permissible rhetorical comment afforded counsel during summation, responsive to the defendant's summation, constituted fair comment on the evidence, or related to matters which were fairly inferable from the evidence" (People v. Turner, 214 A.D.2d 594; see People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
SANTUCCI, J.P., FLORIO, SCHMIDT and ADAMS, JJ., concur.