Majority
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (George, J.), rendered January 2, 1991, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the contention of the defendant, the admission
Further, we find that the prosecutor’s summation remarks generally constituted a fair response to the defendant’s theory of defense (see, People v Arce, 42 NY2d 179 ). Any improper remarks do not warrant a reversal of the defendant’s conviction (see, People v Roopchand, 107 AD2d 35 , affd 65 NY2d 837 ). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Eiber and Ritter, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Logan 25 NY2d 184 p. 731
- People v. Santana 162 AD2d 191 p. 731
- People v. Arce 42 NY2d 179 p. 731
- People v. Roopchand 107 AD2d 35 p. 731