Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the prosecutor's misstatements of the law in summation constitute reversible error. However, the defendant failed to preserve his contention for appellate review, since the defendant either initially failed to object to the prosecutor's comments which he challenges on appeal or failed to request curative instructions after the trial court sustained his objection (see, CPL 470.05; People v Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951; People v Nunez, 184 A.D.2d 594; People v Burrell, 178 A.D.2d 422).
In any event, the defendant's claim is without merit. During summation the prosecutor repeatedly stated that the defendant and the codefendant's acts tended to effect the commission of a robbery. However, it cannot be said that the prosecutor's comments deprived the defendant of a fair trial, since the prosecutor's remarks were an accurate statement of the law (see, Penal Law § 110.00) and were a fair response to the comments by the defense counsel on summation (see, People v Hart, 176 A.D.2d 148). Mangano, P.J., Miller, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.