People v. Baldwin

297 A.D.2d 818, 747 N.Y.2d 810, 747 N.Y.S.2d 810, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8857
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 30, 2002·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The prosecution advanced sufficient race-neutral explana[819]*819tions for exercising peremptory challenges against the prospective jurors in question (see People v Payne, 88 NY2d 172, 183; People v Allen, 86 NY2d 101). The defendant failed to satisfy his burden of proving that the explanations given by the prosecutor were pretextual (see People v Payne, supra; People v White, 289 AD2d 270; see generally Hernandez v New York, 500 US 352, 364-365). Accordingly, the trial court properly denied the defendant’s Batson challenge (see Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). S. Miller, J.P., Crane, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Baldwin, 297 A.D.2d 818, 747 N.Y.2d 810, 747 N.Y.S.2d 810, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8857 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

297 A.D.2d 818 (People v. Baldwin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Baldwin
308 A.D.2d 595 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
People v. Alston
307 A.D.2d 1046 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)