| People v Moore |
| 2010 NY Slip Op 07200 [77 AD3d 685] |
| October 5, 2010 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v DavidMoore, Appellant. |
—[*1] Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J.Caferri, and Laura T. Ross of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Buchter, J.),rendered April 23, 2008, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, assault in the firstdegree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposingsentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that various remarks made by the prosecutor during summation wereimproper and deprived him of a fair trial. This contention, however, is unpreserved for appellate review(see CPL 470.05 [2]; People vAlmonte, 23 AD3d 392, 394 [2005]). In any event, the challenged remarks were permissiblerhetorical comment (see People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396 [1981]), a fair response to thearguments and issues raised by the defense (see People v Halm, 81 NY2d 819 [1993];People v McHarris, 297 AD2d 824 [2002]), fair comment on the evidence (see People vAshwal, 39 NY2d 105 [1976]), or harmless error (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230[1975]; People v Maldonado, 55 AD3d626 [2008]; People v Brown, 272 AD2d 338 [2000]).
Furthermore, under the circumstances of this case, defense counsel's failure to object to thechallenged remarks did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel (see People v Tonge, 93NY2d 838 [1999]; People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708 [1998]; People v Robbins, 48 AD3d 711[2008]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80, 83 [1982]).
The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, iswithout merit. Santucci, J.P., Balkin, Belen and Chambers, JJ., concur.