Opinion
March 20, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kriendler, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
None of the defendant's claims of error with regard to the allegedly prejudicial remarks made by the prosecutor during summation are preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05; see, People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953). Nor was the defendant deprived of a fair trial by those comments of which he now complains (see, People v. Roopchand, 107 A.D.2d 35, affd 65 N.Y.2d 837).
Finally, the sentence imposed upon the defendant was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Thompson and Rubin, JJ., concur.