Opinion
March 9, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Deeley, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
During summation, the prosecutrix was permitted, over objection, to argue that the police officers who testified would not jeopardize their careers by lying on the witness stand. While this tactic is generally impermissible (see, People v Bonaparte, 98 A.D.2d 778; People v. Webb, 68 A.D.2d 331), under the circumstances of this case, it was a fair response to the defense summation (see, People v. Blackman, 88 A.D.2d 620; People v Alexandria, 126 A.D.2d 655).
Since the factual assertions at the defendant's prior plea allocution neither indicate the possibility that the degree of intoxication at the time of the prior crime negated his intent, nor raise the possibility that that crime was in any way justified, the defendant was properly sentenced as a prior felony offender. We have considered the defendant's other contentions and find them to be without merit. Rubin, J.P., Kunzeman, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.