Opinion
June 27, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the prosecutor's summation comments improperly evoked the sympathy of the jury, and implied that the defendant had fabricated his testimony after hearing the prosecution witnesses testify. However, the defendant failed to preserve his contentions for appellate review, since the defendant failed to object to the prosecutor's comments (see, CPL 470.05; see also, People v. Goodman, 190 A.D.2d 862). In any event, the comments were not so prejudicial as to warrant a reversal of the conviction in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction, especially in light of the overwhelming evidence against the defendant (see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; see also, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v Russo, 201 A.D.2d 512).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.