Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's challenges to various remarks of the prosecutor during summation are unpreserved for appellate review either because his objections were too general or because he did not seek further curative instructions or a mistrial after the court sustained his objections (see, CPL 470.05 Crim. Proc. [2]; People v. Heide, 84 N.Y.2d 943; People v. Tevaha, 84 N.Y.2d 879; People v. Antonio, 255 A.D.2d 449; People v. Oreckinto, 253 A.D.2d 896). In any event, any error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, including identification testimony by the victim and by the defendant's accomplice as well as the defendant's possession of the victim's property (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230). Similarly, in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, the court's failure to instruct the jury that reasonable doubt could arise due to a lack of evidence was harmless (see, People v. Crimmins, supra; People v. Roldos, 161 A.D.2d 610). The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.