Opinion
October 23, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Marrus, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The great majority of the comments made in the prosecutor's summation which are now asserted as error were either not objected to at trial or an objection was sustained and a curative instruction given. Consequently, these claims are not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law (see, People v Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953; People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467). Moreover, the alleged vouching by the prosecutor constituted fair response to the defense counsel's summation in which the People's witnesses were accused, inter alia, of having "concocted" and "fabricated" their testimony (see, People v Colonna, 135 A.D.2d 724; People v Colon, 122 A.D.2d 150; People v Lafayette, 118 A.D.2d 593).
We further find that the sentence imposed was not unduly harsh or excessive and does not warrant reduction in the interest of justice (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Brown, J.P., Lawrence, Kooper and Spatt, JJ., concur.