Opinion
March 6, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contentions that he was denied a fair trial due to certain comments made by the prosecutor during opening and summation have not been preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Tevaha, 84 N.Y.2d 879; People v Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818; People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951).
In any event, the prosecutor's reference regarding the indictment during the opening statement did not prejudice the defendant in light of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt and the trial court's instruction to the jury which served to cure any alleged prejudice (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. James, 197 A.D.2d 429; People v. Roopchand, 107 A.D.2d 35, affd 65 N.Y.2d 837). In addition, since the identification of the defendant was a relevant factor in this trial, the prosecutor's reference during summation to the defendant's changed hair style, as evidenced by a photograph of the defendant at the time of his arrest, was fair comment upon the "four corners of the evidence" (see, People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105, 109; People v. Neal, 200 A.D.2d 773). Santucci, J.P., Joy, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.