DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, questions and remarks by the prosecutor during voir dire, opening, and cross examination were fair comment on the evidence, or within the bounds of permissible rhetoric ( see People v. Adamo, 309 A.D.2d 808; People v. Mejias, 296 A.D.2d 583; People v. Vasquez, 287 A.D.2d 584; People v. Etoria, 266 A.D.2d 559).
While the prosecutor's references to religion during summation were improper, they were harmless in light of the overwhelming proof of the defendant's guilt ( see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v. Ivory, 307 A.D.2d 1000, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 643; People v. Anderson, 304 A.D.2d 450, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 592; People v. Taylor, 162 A.D.2d 175). Contrary to the defendant's contention on appeal, the remainder of the prosecutor's comments on summation were fair comment on the evidence or within the bounds of permissible rhetoric.
FLORIO, J.P., SMITH, LUCIANO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.