Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's challenge to the supplemental jury instructions is unpreserved for review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467, 471-473; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 248-252), and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
The defendant's argument regarding the prosecution's summation is largely unpreserved for appellate review, as well (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951, 953; People v. Udzinski, supra). To the extent that the issue is preserved, we find that the prosecutor's comments constituted a fair response to the defense counsel's summation (see, People v Rodriguez, 154 A.D.2d 488; People v. Colonna, 135 A.D.2d 724), or were not so prejudicial as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial (see, People v. Roopchand, 107 A.D.2d 35, 36, affd 65 N.Y.2d 837). Lawrence, J.P., Ritter, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.