Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The record indicates that the court gave an immediate and detailed curative instruction to the jury in response to the prosecutor's improper statement during summation that "this entire procedure is not a search for reasonable doubt". In addition, the court in its charge gave extensive instructions to the jury on the presumption of innocence, the prosecutor's burden of proof, and the meaning of reasonable doubt. Under these circumstances, "no substantial prejudice to the defendant resulted, and the error was rendered harmless" (People v McCorkle, 119 A.D.2d 700, 701, lv denied 67 N.Y.2d 1054).
In a similar vein, the trial court quickly intervened to effectively limit the prosecutor's brief foray, on cross-examination, into the issue of the defendant's use of two aliases (see, People v. Sellars, 74 A.D.2d 551; cf., People v Bannerman, 110 A.D.2d 706, 707).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, J.P., Weinstein, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.