Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).
The prosecutor's comment in his summation on the defendant's exercise of his constitutional right to remain silent had the potential for prejudice (see, People v Kent, 125 A.D.2d 590, 591; People v Von Werne, 41 N.Y.2d 584). However, the risk of any such prejudice was dissipated by the court's prompt curative instruction and subsequent charge to the jury (see, People v Berg, 59 N.Y.2d 294, 299-300; People v Thomas, 147 A.D.2d 725).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Kunzeman, J.P., Kooper, Sullivan and Miller, JJ., concur.