People v. Spinelli

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hollie, J.) rendered September 17, 2008, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in denying his request for a missing witness charge is unpreserved for appellate review since the specific arguments he now makes were not raised before the trial court (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Lopez, 19 AD3d 510 , 511 [2005]). In any event, the contention is without merit, as the defendant failed to demonstrate that the testimony of the witness in question would have been favorable to the People (see People v Keen, 94 NY2d 533 , 539 [2000]; People v Smith, 71 AD3d 1174 , 1175 [2010]) or that the witness was under the People’s control (see People v Jacobs, 65 AD3d 594 , 596 [2009]). Moreover, the witness was equally available to both parties (see People v Clas, 54 AD3d 770 , 771 [2008]).

The defendant’s contention that various comments made by the prosecutor during summation were improper and deprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for appellate review, as the defendant either did not object to the remarks at issue (see CPL 470.05 [2]), made only general one-word objections (see People v Salnave, 41 AD3d 872 , 874 [2007]), or failed to seek curative