Opinion
February 11, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lombardo, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
At trial, the People proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant fatally stabbed the victim 49 times with knives which the police recovered from him at the scene during his arrest. With respect to the defendant's claims of prejudice resulting from the prosecutor's summation, we find that the challenged remarks were responsive to the defense counsel's summation and constituted fair comment upon the evidence (see, People v Rivera, 158 A.D.2d 723). With respect to the single remaining preserved claim of error, it is our conclusion that, although it was improper for the prosecutor to state that the deceased victim would have identified the defendant as her assailant, such error was harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 241-242).
The defendant further argues that his conviction must be reversed because the court supplied the jury with an improper verdict sheet which impermissibly contained "indictment-like" language (see, e.g., People v Nimmons, 72 N.Y.2d 830; People v McKenzie, 148 A.D.2d 472). However, no objection was raised regarding the form or content of the court's proposed verdict sheet. This alleged error is thus unpreserved for appellate review and reversal in the interest of justice is unwarranted (see, People v McClain, 168 A.D.2d 514; People v Lugo, 150 A.D.2d 502; People v Mathis, 150 A.D.2d 613). Kunzeman, J.P., Kooper, Eiber and O'Brien, JJ., concur.