People v. Arias

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Arias

267 A.D.2d 244, 699 N.Y.S.2d 309, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12522

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 6, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 267 A.D.2d 244 (People v. Arias) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Arias, 267 A.D.2d 244, 699 N.Y.S.2d 309, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12522 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McDonald, J.), rendered September 16, 1998, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

During jury selection, the defense counsel argued that the prosecutor exercised peremptory challenges to exclude three prospective jurors on the basis of their race in violation of Batson v Kentucky (476 US 79). The prosecutor provided race-neutral explanations which the defense counsel contended were pretextual. We agree with the Supreme Court that the reasons given were not pretextual. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, McGinity and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McDonald, J.), rendered September 16, 1998, convicting him of criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

During jury selection, the defense counsel argued that the prosecutor exercised peremptory challenges to exclude three prospective jurors on the basis of their race in violation of Batson v Kentucky (476 US 79). The prosecutor provided race-neutral explanations which the defense counsel contended were pretextual. We agree with the Supreme Court that the reasons given were not pretextual. S. Miller, J. P., O’Brien, McGinity and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 244, 699 N.Y.S.2d 309, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-arias-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack