PEOPLE v. BAINES (2000)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered July 15, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (six counts) and robbery in the second degree (three counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The prosecutor's comments on summation were either fair responses to the defense summation (see, People v. Alvarado, 262 A.D.2d 651, 693 N.Y.S.2d 189;  People v. Rivera, 158 A.D.2d 723, 552 N.Y.S.2d 171;  People v. Colonna, 135 A.D.2d 724, 522 N.Y.S.2d 625), or, if improper, were the subject of appropriate curative instructions (see, People v. Hawthorne, 175 A.D.2d 880, 573 N.Y.S.2d 727, affd. as modified 80 N.Y.2d 873, 587 N.Y.S.2d 600, 600 N.E.2d 231;  People v. Johnson, 154 A.D.2d 618, 546 N.Y.S.2d 448).

The defendant is not entitled to a new trial as a result of the prosecutor's alleged failure to disclose the record of conviction of one of the People's witnesses (see, CPL 240.45[1][b] ).   The defense counsel was made aware of the conviction, and used it for impeachment purposes on cross-examination (see, People v. Lane, 221 A.D.2d 371, 633 N.Y.S.2d 350;  People v. Fuentes, 199 A.D.2d 980, 605 N.Y.S.2d 598;  People v. Clark, 194 A.D.2d 868, 869, 598 N.Y.S.2d 847).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.