| People v Scurry |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 08865 [123 AD3d 949] |
| December 17, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Carey Scurry, Appellant. |
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Bryan D. Kreykes of counsel), forappellant.
Kenneth P. Thompson, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and LoriGlachman of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County(Dowling, J.), rendered June 4, 2012, convicting him of burglary in the second degree(three counts) and unlawful possession of marijuana, upon a jury verdict, and imposingsentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the People's contention, the defendant preserved for appellate reviewmost of his claims that the prosecutor engaged in improper questioning duringcross-examination and that various comments made by the prosecutor during thesummation were improper and deprived him of a fair trial (see CPL 470.05 [2];People v De Jesus, 42 NY2d 519, 526 [1977]). However, all of the challengedquestioning and remarks were either within the broad bounds of rhetorical commentpermissible in closing arguments (see People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396, 399[1981]; People v McHarris, 297 AD2d 824, 825 [2002]), fair response to defensecounsel's summation (seePeople v Marcus, 112 AD3d 652, 653 [2013]; People v Phillips, 285AD2d 477, 478 [2001]), fair comment on the defendant's testimony and other evidence(see People v Wilson, 77AD3d 858, 859 [2010]; People v Siriani, 27 AD3d 670 [2006]), cured by the trialcourt's charge and instructions to the jury (see People v Flowers, 102 AD3d 885, 886 [2013]; People v Pocesta, 71 AD3d920, 921 [2010]; People vWilson, 50 AD3d 711, 712 [2008]), or, if improper, were not so egregious as todeprive the defendant of a fair trial (see People v Persaud, 98 AD3d 527, 529 [2012];People v Pocesta, 71 AD3d at 921). Mastro, J.P., Roman, Sgroi and Maltese, JJ.,concur.