People v. Bowen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bowen

286 A.D.2d 645, 730 N.Y.S.2d 436, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8869

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

DecidedSeptember 27, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 286 A.D.2d 645 (People v. Bowen) 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. Bowen, 286 A.D.2d 645, 730 N.Y.S.2d 436, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8869 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald Zweibel, J.), rendered February 11, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of AVz to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record clearly establishes that the basis for the court’s denial of defendant’s application made pursuant to Batson v Kentucky (476 US 79) was defendant’s failure to make a prima facie showing of racial discrimination. After the court made a finding that no prima facie case had been established, the prosecutor nevertheless volunteered race-neutral explanations for the challenges at issue and the court found them to be nonpretextual. However, the court subsequently reiterated that the basis of its ruling was the lack of a prima facie case of discrimination. Accordingly, that issue is not moot (see, People v Ocasio, 253 AD2d 720, lv denied 92 NY2d 1036), and we find that the record supports the court’s determination (see, People v Jenkins, 84 NY2d 1001; People v Childress, 81 NY2d 263, 267). In any event, we find that the explanations proffered by the prosecution concerning the subject jurors’ employment and demeanor were not pretextual (see, People v Hernandez, 75 NY2d 350, affd 500 US 352). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald Zweibel, J.), rendered February 11, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of AVz to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record clearly establishes that the basis for the court’s denial of defendant’s application made pursuant to Batson v Kentucky (476 US 79) was defendant’s failure to make a prima facie showing of racial discrimination. After the court made a finding that no prima facie case had been established, the prosecutor nevertheless volunteered race-neutral explanations for the challenges at issue and the court found them to be nonpretextual. However, the court subsequently reiterated that the basis of its ruling was the lack of a prima facie case of discrimination. Accordingly, that issue is not moot (see, People v Ocasio, 253 AD2d 720, lv denied 92 NY2d 1036), and we find that the record supports the court’s determination (see, People v Jenkins, 84 NY2d 1001; People v Childress, 81 NY2d 263, 267). In any event, we find that the explanations proffered by the prosecution concerning the subject jurors’ employment and demeanor were not pretextual (see, People v Hernandez, 75 NY2d 350, affd 500 US 352). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 A.D.2d 645, 730 N.Y.S.2d 436, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bowen-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack