Judgment affirmed.
The evidence of defendant's conduct and the circumstances surrounding his entry into the complainant's apartment were sufficient to support the inference, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant intended to commit a crime therein (see People v Barnes, 50 N.Y.2d 375; People v Mackey, 49 N.Y.2d 274; People v Castillo, 47 N.Y.2d 270). Defendant's arguments that the court's charge with respect to intent was inadequate and that he was denied a fair trial as a result of prosecutorial misconduct during summation have not been preserved for review, as a matter of law, since he failed to object to the charge or to the comments he now claims were improper ( People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467; People v Dawson, 50 N.Y.2d 311). Nor is review in the interest of justice warranted in the circumstances of this case. We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Lazer, J.P., Thompson, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.