People v Williams

People v Williams 2009 NY Slip Op 06046 [64 AD3d 800] July 28, 2009 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, September 2, 2009

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
Philip Williams, Appellant.

—[*1] Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (John Gemmill of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Howard B. Goodman, and Marie John-Drigo of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ingram, J.), rendered September 1, 2005, convicting him of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that certain statements made by the prosecutor during summation deprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05; People v Molinaro, 62 AD3d 724 [2009]; People v Brown, 60 AD3d 962 [2009]). In any event, the challenged comments constituted fair comment on the evidence (see People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105, 109 [1976]), were responsive to the arguments presented in defense counsel's summation (see People v Galloway, 54 NY2d 396, 400-401 [1981]), or were harmless (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 239 [1975]).

The defendant's contention that the prosecutor violated the court's Sandoval ruling (see People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371 [1974]) is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit. Mastro, J.P., Santucci, Eng and Lott, JJ., concur.