Opinion
December 28, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he is entitled to a new trial as a result of certain remarks by the prosecutor. during summation is, for the most part, unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Zephir, 226 A.D.2d 408). In any event, the comments made by the prosecutor during summation were either fair comment on the evidence, permissive rhetorical comment, responsive to the defendant's summation ( see, People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105; People v. Turner, 214 A.D.2d 594), or were not so prejudicial as to constitute reversible error in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt ( see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for, appellate review or without merit.
Copertino, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.