People v. Singh

Nov 18, 2002
Versions:

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Erlbaum, J.), rendered January 27, 2000, convicting him of assault in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and resisting arrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

*499The defendant’s objections to the allegedly prejudicial comments made by the prosecutor in his cross-examination of defense witnesses and his summation are largely unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]), or are without merit (see People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396; People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105). Moreover, the trial court sustained objections made by the defense counsel to those comments which were improper, and gave curative instructions to the jury. While the prosecutor did imbue his cross-examination as well as his summation remarks with sarcasm, this did not require reversal (see People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133). Any errors regarding the prosecutor’s cross-examination of defense witnesses or on summation were harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J.P., Feuerstein, O’Brien and Luciano, JJ., concur.