| People v Banyan |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 01990 [60 AD3d 861] |
| March 17, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Jonathan Banyan, Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Jodi L. Mandel, andDanielle Gurkin of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Collini, J.),rendered November 9, 2006, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the seconddegree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Most of the remarks in the prosecutor's summation that are challenged by the defendant onappeal constituted a fair response to defense counsel's summation or fair comment on theevidence, were within the bounds of permissible rhetorical comment, or were the subject ofeffective curative instructions by the trial court (see People v Halm, 81 NY2d 819[1993]; People v Turner, 214 AD2d 594 [1995]; People v Peterson, 186 AD2d231, 232 [1992]). While some of the remarks were improper, they were "not so flagrant orpervasive as to deny the defendant a fair trial" (People v Almonte, 23 AD3d 392, 394 [2005]; see People vMorales, 168 AD2d 85, 90 [1991]) and, thus, reversal is not warranted (see People vGalloway, 54 NY2d 396 [1981]; People v Almonte, 23 AD3d at 394; People vRoopchand, 107 AD2d 35, 36 [1985], affd 65 NY2d 837 [1985]).[*2]
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.Prudenti, P.J., Ritter, Santucci and Covello, JJ., concur.