Court Opinion

ID: 9920492
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-18 23:37:49.130481+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:24:21.875814
License: Public Domain

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Katz, J.), rendered October 15, 1997, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s challenge to the legal sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Johnson, 185 AD2d 247). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it is legally sufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defendant’s challenge to the comments made by the prosecutor during summation is largely unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951; People v Morris, 244 AD2d 361). In any event, the prosecutor’s summation remarks were either a proper comment on the evidence (see, People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105) or a fair response to the defense counsel’s summation (see, People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396). O’Brien, J. P., S. Miller, Friedmann and Townes, JJ., concur.