Opinion
March 7, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that a detective's testimony that he arrested the defendant based on his interviews with the People's key witnesses improperly bolstered the testimony of those witnesses (see, People v. Trowbridge, 305 N.Y. 471; People v Holt, 67 N.Y.2d 819). However, no objection to the detective's testimony was made. Therefore, the issue is not preserved for appellate review (see, People v. Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818; CPL 470.05). In any event, the claim is without merit. Nowhere in the detective's testimony is there a statement that any of the witnesses identified the defendant as the killer. Furthermore, in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, any error was harmless (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. Johnson, 57 N.Y.2d 969).
The defendant also argues that the prosecutor's reference in his summation, which was made the day after Mother's Day, to the loss suffered by the victim's children was an improper appeal to the jurors' emotions. While we agree that the prosecutor's remark departed from acceptable professional conduct (see, People v Rodriguez, 135 A.D.2d 586; People v. Baldo, 107 A.D.2d 751), it did not deny the defendant a fair trial in light of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt (see, People v. Barry, 125 A.D.2d 581, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 947). In any event, the court promptly admonished the jury not to let their sympathies enter into their deliberations.
Finally, we find no basis in the record to support the defendant's contentions that the trial court abused its discretion by imposing the maximum sentence or that this court should reduce the sentence in the interests of justice (see, People v. Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, J.P., Lawrence, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.