Opinion
2001-05682
Argued March 20, 2003.
April 21, 2003.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D'Emic, J.), rendered June 14, 2001, convicting him of sexual abuse in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Yvonne Shivers of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Victor Barall, and Christopher Ronk of counsel), for respondent.
Before: SONDRA MILLER, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, LEO F. McGINITY, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that certain comments made by the prosecutor during cross-examination and summation constituted reversible error is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05; People v. Harris, 98 N.Y.2d 452, 491 n 18; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 20-21; People v. Dien, 77 N.Y.2d 885; People v. Smith, 298 A.D.2d 607). In any event, the prosecutor's comments were within the bounds of permissible rhetorical comment, were a fair response to the defense counsel's direct examination and summation (see People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105, 109; People v. Clemmings, 300 A.D.2d 672; People v. Valdes, 291 A.D.2d 513, 514; People v. Russo, 201 A.D.2d 512, 513, affd 85 N.Y.2d 872), or were harmless under the circumstances of this case.
S. MILLER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, McGINITY and MASTRO, JJ., concur.