Opinion
June 17, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.).
Defendant's argument that he was deprived of a fair trial by the prosecutor's remarks on summation is largely unpreserved, and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice. Were we to consider this argument, we would find that the comments do not constitute reversible error.
While the prosecutor's reference to tailoring was improper (People v. Butler, 185 A.D.2d 141, 144), the majority of his remarks were properly prefaced with language recognized as indicating suggestion, such as "I submit" and "I suggest" (People v. Hernandez, 91 A.D.2d 227, 230, revd on other grounds 59 N.Y.2d 881). Furthermore, referring to defendant's fact recitation as a "story" is not prohibited; it falls within the broad bounds of permissible rhetorical comment (People v Rivera, 158 A.D.2d 344, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 741). The majority of the prosecutor's remarks constitute fair response to defendant's summation, and the evidence of defendant's guilt was overwhelming (People v. Morgan, 66 N.Y.2d 255).
Several of defendant's remaining arguments are unpreserved, and all are without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Ross and Asch, JJ.