ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's challenges to various remarks made by the prosecutor during summation are unpreserved for appellate review, as he failed to raise specific objections to the remarks in question (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, the challenged remarks were either responsive to the defense counsel's summation (see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396), within the bounds of permissible rhetorical comment, or constituted fair comment on the evidence (see, People v. Ashwal, 39 N.Y.2d 105; People v. Russo, 201 A.D.2d 512, 513, affd 85 N.Y.2d 872). Moreover, since the defendant elected to present a defense, the prosecutor's comment alluding to the defendant's failure to call a certain witness on his behalf did not constitute an impermissible effort to shift the burden of proof (see, People v. Tankleff, 84 N.Y.2d 992; People v. Wood, 271 A.D.2d 705; People v. Guillebeaux, 229 A.D.2d 399).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 83).
FLORIO, J.P., S. MILLER, McGINITY and ADAMS, JJ., concur.