People v. Chiriboga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Chiriboga

248 A.D.2d 629, 669 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2940

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

DecidedMarch 23, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D.2d 629 (People v. Chiriboga) 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. Chiriboga, 248 A.D.2d 629, 669 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2940 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), rendered November 28, 1994, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two [630]*630counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the prosecutor improperly exercised peremptory challenges to exclude women from the jury (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79) is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Smith, 81 NY2d 875; People v Cruz, 200 AD2d 581; People v Dyce, 196 AD2d 506), and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Santucci and Goldstein, 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, Queens County (Flug, J.), rendered November 28, 1994, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two [630]*630counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that the prosecutor improperly exercised peremptory challenges to exclude women from the jury (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79) is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Smith, 81 NY2d 875; People v Cruz, 200 AD2d 581; People v Dyce, 196 AD2d 506), and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 629, 669 N.Y.S.2d 935, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2940, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chiriboga-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack