PEOPLE v. SYKES

Judgment affirmed.

During the course of the cross-examination of the defendant, the prosecutor (1) asked the defendant whether certain prosecution witnesses were lying and (2) suggested, through a question posed without proper foundation, that defendant was on drugs at the time of the crime. These questions were improper and have been repeatedly condemned (People v Billingsley, 74 A.D.2d 645; People v McCormick, 100 A.D.2d 723; People v Walston, 99 A.D.2d 847). We again admonish the District Attorney to refrain from this conduct in the future.

Nevertheless, under the circumstances, it cannot be said that defendant was deprived of a fair trial, and in view of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt, these errors must be regarded as harmless (see, People v Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396; People v Tayeh, 96 A.D.2d 1045).

We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and find that they either are without merit or pertain to matters dehors the record. Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Brown and Eiber, JJ., concur.