Opinion
October 29, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Alfred Donati, J.).
The limited background testimony regarding the roles played in street level drug operations and the fact that the police target certain locations based on community complaints was properly admitted. It was relevant to establish the nature of the co-defendant's involvement in the transaction and to explain the officers' actions ( People v. Lacey, 245 A.D.2d 145, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 927; People v. Granado, 222 A.D.2d 286, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 848). Such evidence did not suggest drug operations of greater magnitude than street level ( supra).
We also find that the challenged comments contained in the People's summation were fair comment on the evidence and constituted fair response to defendant's arguments ( see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
Concur — Lerner, P. J., Milonas, Ellerin, Rubin and Williams, JJ.