Contrary to defendant's contention, the trial court acted within its discretion in determining that the interpreter was competent (People v Catron, 143 A.D.2d 468). There was no showing that any serious error in translation occurred during trial which would warrant a reversal (People v Rolston, 109 A.D.2d 854, 855).
Defendant raises several arguments with respect to the prosecutor's summation. He first contends that the prosecutor improperly vouched for the People's witnesses. However, the statements made were in fair response to arguments raised by the defense in summation (People v Colon, 122 A.D.2d 151, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 810). The remaining contentions were not preserved as a matter of law and we, therefore, decline to reach them. Were we to consider them, we would nevertheless affirm, finding them to be without merit and that the summation was in fair response to defense arguments.
Defendant also fails to show that the court abused its discretion in sentencing (People v Junco, 43 A.D.2d 266, 268, affd 35 N.Y.2d 419, cert denied 421 U.S. 951).
Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Asch, Kassal, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.