PEOPLE v. WOODWARDS

Defendant did not object to the prosecutor's single summation comment he now claims deprived him of a fair trial, and thus did not preserve his current claim of error (CPL 470.05; People v Iannelli, 69 N.Y.2d 684, cert denied 482 U.S. 914). In any event, taken in context, the comment constituted appropriate response to the defense summation (People v Marks, 6 N.Y.2d 67, cert denied 362 U.S. 912), and fair comment on the evidence, presented within the broad bounds of rhetorical comment permissible in closing argument (People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396). Further, in light of the overwhelming evidence against defendant, any inartful phrasing by the prosecutor in closing argument is deemed harmless error (People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rubin, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.