Opinion
September 26, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The undercover police officer's testimony that she observed the defendant "touch a person's hand" and, later, that she saw "money being exchanged between" the defendant and another individual was inextricably interwoven with evidence of the crimes charged. It was also necessary to complete the narrative of events leading to the defendant's arrest. Therefore, the testimony was properly admitted into evidence (see, People v. Crandall, 67 N.Y.2d 111; People v. Seaberry, 138 A.D.2d 422; People v. Henry, 166 A.D.2d 720).
The defendant's contentions that the prosecutor, in his summation, deprived the defendant of a fair trial by shifting the burden of proof, making arguments outside of the evidence, ridiculing the defense, inflaming the emotions of the jury, and vouching for the People's witnesses are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05) or meritless. In any event, those comments which are preserved for appellate review were merely made in response to defense counsel's comments that questioned the credibility of the People's witnesses (see, People v. Trail, 172 A.D.2d 320). Thompson, J.P., Sullivan, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.