Opinion
2002-07819.
Decided June 7, 2004.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), rendered August 5, 2002, convicting him of burglary in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Jay L. Weiner of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Ann Bordley of counsel; Anne Buckman on the brief), for respondent.
Before: SONDRA MILLER, J.P., THOMAS A. ADAMS, BARRY A. COZIER, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contentions regarding the prosecutor's summation remarks are largely unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant made only general objections or did not object to the comments in question ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, the prosecutor's remarks were fair comment on the evidence and fair responses to the defense counsel's statements in summation ( see People v. Russo, 201 A.D.2d 512, affd 85 N.Y.2d 872). Moreover, since the prosecutor did not state his personal belief regarding the truthfulness of the People's witness, it cannot be said that he improperly vouched for the witness's credibility ( see People v. Evans, 291 A.D.2d 569).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are unpreserved for appellate review, and in any event, are without merit.
S. MILLER, J.P., ADAMS, COZIER and RIVERA, JJ., concur.