Opinion
January 20, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Broomer, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's argument, the evidence of identification, when viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find that the defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Foster, 64 N.Y.2d 1144, cert denied ___ US ___, 106 S Ct 166).
The defendant also alleges that certain comments made by the prosecutor during summation deprived him of a fair trial. We disagree. Many of the remarks of which the defendant now complains were not objected to, and, thus, no issue of law has been preserved for appellate review (see, People v. Dordal, 55 N.Y.2d 954). In any event, none of the comments was so improper as to require a new trial (see, People v. Roopchand, 107 A.D.2d 35, affd 65 N.Y.2d 837). Mangano, J.P., Niehoff, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.