Opinion
June 25, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The prosecutor's summation was a fair response to the defense counsel's summation (see, People v. Gavins, 118 A.D.2d 582). Defense counsel made the credibility of the complaining witness the central focus of her summation. Under the circumstances, the prosecutor's comments did not constitute improper bolstering. Moreover, the remarks neither shifted the burden of proof nor appealed to juror sympathy. Rather, the prosecutor's remarks represented a fair response to defense counsel's summation (see, People v. Lilly, 139 A.D.2d 671).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the facts of this case do not amount to a "rare case" where the sentence imposed is unconstitutionally harsh as applied (see, People v. Broadie, 37 N.Y.2d 100, 119, cert denied 423 U.S. 950; People v. Serviss, 137 A.D.2d 637; People v. Donovan, 89 A.D.2d 968, affd 59 N.Y.2d 834; cf., People v. Robinson, 68 A.D.2d 413). Brown, J.P., Kooper, Eiber and O'Brien, JJ., concur.