People v. Belcher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Belcher

264 A.D.2d 742, 695 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9058

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

DecidedSeptember 13, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 264 A.D.2d 742 (People v. Belcher) 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. Belcher, 264 A.D.2d 742, 695 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9058 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.), rendered May 16, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the trial court erred in determining, over his objection, that the People had established a prima facie case of discrimination in support of a reverse Bat-son challenge (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79; People v Payne, 88 NY2d 172; People v Kern, 75 NY2d 638, cert denied 498 US 824). However, because the court ruled on the ultimate issue of whether the race-neutral reasons proffered by the defense were pretextual, the issue of whether or not the People established a prima facie case of discrimination is academic (see, People v Payne, supra, at 181-182; People v Franklin, 248 AD2d 726; People v Hill, 245 AD2d 464). Ritter, J. P., Thompson, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.), rendered May 16, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the trial court erred in determining, over his objection, that the People had established a prima facie case of discrimination in support of a reverse Bat-son challenge (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79; People v Payne, 88 NY2d 172; People v Kern, 75 NY2d 638, cert denied 498 US 824). However, because the court ruled on the ultimate issue of whether the race-neutral reasons proffered by the defense were pretextual, the issue of whether or not the People established a prima facie case of discrimination is academic (see, People v Payne, supra, at 181-182; People v Franklin, 248 AD2d 726; People v Hill, 245 AD2d 464). Ritter, J. P., Thompson, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 742, 695 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-belcher-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack