Opinion
December 14, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Bernstein, J.).
To the extent that the prosecutor's summation comments vouching for the credibility of the undercover officer, describing the case as "simple" in comparison to a murder or civil case for which the jurors could have been selected, and characterizing defendant as being involved in the "business" of selling drugs, caused prejudice that was not cured by the court's curative instructions, the prejudice was harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt ( see, People v. Jackson, 213 A.D.2d 257, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 736). Defendant's challenges to other prosecutorial comments referring to the overall factual simplicity of the case and suggesting that the jury use their watches to determine the true duration of seven minutes, the period of the undercover officer's interaction with the defendant, are unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05), and in any event without merit, the comments in question all being properly responsive to defendant's arguments ( People v. Burns, 173 A.D.2d 332, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 962; see, People v Colon, 172 A.D.2d 173, 175, affd 78 N.Y.2d 998). Defendant's other claims are without merit.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Tom, JJ.