Opinion
February 14, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Bernstein, J.).
We reject defendant's contention that the prosecutor's remarks on summation exceeded the court's pretrial in limine ruling and impinged his due process rights by implying that he had committed an uncharged attempted robbery immediately prior to his arrest on the weapon possession charge, the contested comments being directly responsive to arguments raised by the defense and their effect being properly curtailed by the court's immediate curative instructions (see, People v. Morgan, 66 N.Y.2d 255).
Nor do we find persuasive defendant's argument that the prosecutor shifted the burden of proof by questioning both the timing of his decision to present a character witness and the meaning underlying his decision to present only that witness as his defense, the court having sustained his objections thereto and issued immediate curative instructions, which the jury is presumed to have followed (see, People v. Pizzaro, 184 A.D.2d 448, 449, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 908).
In any event, in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, the prosecutor's remarks, if at all improper, were harmless error (People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 236).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.