Opinion
March 29, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Linakis, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that his right to a fair trial was violated by the prosecutor's remarks during opening and closing statements, coupled with the testimony of a police officer, implying the defendant's guilt of an unrelated burglary just prior to his arrest leading to this indictment. We find that the prosecutor's remarks, coupled with certain testimony of the police officer constituted error, since neither the remarks nor the testimony were necessary to complete the narrative (cf., People v. Gines, 36 N.Y.2d 932). However, in light of the overwhelming proof of guilt, the error was harmless (see, People v. Jones, 182 A.D.2d 708).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either without merit or do not require reversal. Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, Lawrence and O'Brien, JJ., concur.