Opinion
April 17, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (George, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contentions regarding the prosecutor's summation are, in part, unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Reding, 167 A.D.2d 716). As to those contentions which were properly preserved, the challenged comments were, for the most part, fair responses to the defense counsel's attacks upon witness credibility (see, People v Diaz, 209 A.D.2d 632; People v Boyajian, 148 A.D.2d 740, 741) or properly limited to matters within the four corners of the evidence (see, People v Stanley, 163 A.D.2d 435). In any event, any error with respect to the preserved or unpreserved claims was harmless in light of the overwhelming proof of guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
The defendant's remaining contention regarding the court's charge is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245), and, in any event, without merit. Bracken, J.P., Pizzuto, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.