Opinion
February 1, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his contention that reversible error took place as a result of certain remarks by the prosecutor during summation ( see, CPL 470.05). In any event, the remarks made by the prosecutor during summation were either fair comment on the evidence, permissive rhetorical comment, or responsive to the defendant's summation ( see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; People v. Baker, 251 A.D.2d 592; People v. Harris, 209 A.D.2d 432; People v. Gibbs, 166 A.D.2d 454; People v. Blackman, 88 A.D.2d 620).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
Mangano, P. J., O'Brien, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.