Opinion
March 24, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard J. Fried, J.).
Despite some inappropriate and uncalled for comments by the prosecutor in summation, defendant's argument that he was thus deprived of a fair trial was unpreserved either because of failure of timely objection (CPL 470.05), or in those instances where the court sustained defendant's objections, because of failure to make a motion for a mistrial (People v Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953). Were we to consider defendant's claims in the interest of justice, we would find that the prosecutor's comments such as those concerning the absence of a potential defense witness, and his characterization of the defense as a "doozie" did not deprive defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Paylor, 70 N.Y.2d 146; People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396, 399).
The jury was properly instructed on how to weigh the past convictions of both defendant and complainant.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.