| People v Rios |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 02419 [105 AD3d 873] |
| April 10, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Michael Rios, Appellant. |
—[*1] Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano andJeanette Lifschitz of counsel; Lorrie A. Zinno on the brief), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County(Kron, J.), rendered May 12, 2011, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upona jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
While we agree with the defendant that certain of the prosecutor's remarks duringsummation improperly denigrated defense counsel (see People v Davis, 39 AD3d 873, 875 [2007]; Peoplev Torres, 223 AD2d 741, 742 [1996]), we find that any prejudice that may haveresulted from these remarks was alleviated when the trial court sustained the objectionsof the defendant and his codefendant and provided prompt curative instructions to thejury (see People v Rayford,80 AD3d 780, 781 [2011]; People v Alexander, 50 AD3d 816, 817 [2008]; Peoplev DeFigueroa, 182 AD2d 772, 773 [1992]), directing that the jury disregard thoseremarks, and explaining why the remarks were improper.
The remaining challenges to the prosecutor's remarks during summation areunpreserved for appellate review since defense counsel failed to object to these remarksor made only general objections, and these remarks were not the basis of his motion for amistrial (see People v Read,97 AD3d 702, 703 [2012]; People v Parker-Davidson, 89 AD3d 1114 [2011]). In anyevent, these remarks were within the broad bounds of rhetorical comment permissible inclosing arguments and constituted fair response to arguments made by defense counsel insummation (see People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396, 399 [1981]; People vAshwal, 39 NY2d 105, 109-110 [1976]; People v Kennedy, 101 AD3d 1045 [2012]; People v Caba, 101 AD3d896 [2012]). Eng, P.J., Dickerson, Hall and Lott, JJ., concur.