Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial by certain purportedly inflammatory remarks made by the prosecutor in the opening statement is unpreserved for appellate review, as the defendant failed to object to the challenged remarks ( see CPL 470.05). In any event, the "`prosecutor's opening statement adequately described what the People intended to prove, and properly prepared the jury to resolve the factual issues at the trial`" ( People v Helenese, 75 AD3d 653, 655, quoting People v Larios, 25 AD3d 569, 570; People v Umoja, 70 AD3d 867, 868; People v Garson, 69 AD3d 650, 651).
The defendant also contends that he was deprived of a fair trial because of certain allegedly improper comments made by the prosecutor on summation. The defendant's contentions, however, are not preserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05). In any event, although several of the prosecutor's comments would have been better left unsaid, they did not, singly or in combination, deprive the defendant of a fair trial ( see People v Valencia, 80 AD3d 632; People v Garcia-Villegas, 78 AD3d 727; People v Turner, 34 AD3d 705; People v Shelton, 307 AD2d 370, aff'd 1 NY3d 614).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.