Opinion
October 23, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fisher, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The People failed to comply with the 15-day notice requirement of CPL 710.30 with respect to two statements made by the defendant. As the People did not establish good cause for the delay in notifying the defendant, it was error to admit those statements into evidence at trial (see, People v O'Doherty, 70 N.Y.2d 479). Nevertheless, the error in admitting those two statements was harmless. The statements were exculpatory in nature and varied only slightly from one other statement made by the defendant which was properly admitted (see, e.g., People v Bennett, 56 N.Y.2d 837), and there was overwhelming proof of the defendant's guilt (cf., People v Boughton, 70 N.Y.2d 854; People v Lubarska, 143 A.D.2d 1048; People v Pinney, 136 A.D.2d 573).
We further find that the defendant's objections to the alleged prejudicial comments in the prosecutor's summation are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05), or are without merit, or the comments constitute harmless error in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230). Brown, J.P., Eiber, Kooper and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.