Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The evidence adduced at trial overwhelmingly established that the defendant was 1 of 3 men who perpetrated an armed street robbery and who was thereafter arrested in possession of the gun used during the robbery when he attempted to prevent the arrest of a codefendant who was found in possession of the victim's wallet, money, and other personal property.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, he was not denied a fair trial as a result of prosecutorial misconduct during the People's summation. While the prosecutor did employ some colorful language in an emphatic summation, his statements were not improper in the context of this case. The prosecutor's summation did not occur in a vacuum (see, People v. Gavins, 118 A.D.2d 582) and it may only be fairly evaluated in comparison to the summations presented by the defense (see, People v. Blackman, 88 A.D.2d 620, 621). In this case three defense attorneys presented summations during which they impugned the credibility of prosecution witnesses so that the prosecution's summation constituted a properly responsive attempt to rehabilitate the credibility of these same witnesses (see, People v. Rawlings, 144 A.D.2d 500; People v. Crawford, 130 A.D.2d 678; People v Turner, 120 A.D.2d 629). Even were we to regard the prosecutor's summation as having gone beyond the realm of that which is properly responsive rehabilitative rhetoric, in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt any prosecutorial misconduct complained of would constitute harmless error (see, People v Roopchand, 107 A.D.2d 35, affd 65 N.Y.2d 837; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
The manner in which the court marshaled the evidence did not deny the defendant a fair trial (see, People v. Saunders, 64 N.Y.2d 665; People v. McDonald, 144 A.D.2d 701; People v. Alvarado, 130 A.D.2d 663; see also, People v. Cutwright, 149 A.D.2d 608), nor was the defendant prejudiced by the court's alibi charge (see, People v. Batten, 141 A.D.2d 746).
We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit (see, e.g., People v. Baker, 153 A.D.2d 865; People v. Brown, 150 A.D.2d 472). Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Miller and O'Brien, JJ., concur.