Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was deprived of his right to 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), inasmuch as the defendant either failed to object to the comments he now challenges, or made only general objections ( see People v Harris, 98 NY2d 452, 491 n 18 [2002]; People v Tonge, 93 NY2d 838, 839-840; People v Jones, 76 AD3d 716; People v Banks, 74 AD3d 1214, lv denied 15 NY3d 849; People v Bey, 71 AD3d 1156). In any event, although several of the prosecutor's comments were better left unsaid, they did not, singly or in combination, deprive the defendant of a fair trial ( see People v Lewis, 72 AD3d 705, 707; People v Porco, 71 AD3d 791 [20101, lv granted 15 NY3d 854; People v Walser, 71 AD3d 706; People v Valerio, 70 AD3d 869).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
The defendant's contention raised in his supplemental pro se brief is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05) and, in any event, under the circumstances of this case, does not require reversal ( cf. CPL 470.15 [a]).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.