People v. Fields

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fields

276 A.D.2d 801, 715 N.Y.S.2d 151, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10995

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Fields. Read the opinion of the Court — 258 A.D.2d 387 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 30, 2000·Published

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (F. [802]*802Rivera, J.), rendered November 12, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In support of his motion pursuant to Batson v Kentucky (476 US 79), the defendant alleged sufficient facts to raise an inference that the prosecutor was engaging in race-based discrimination. In response, the prosecutor offered two race-neutral justifications for the exercise of her peremptory challenge of the prospective juror (see, People v Allen, 86 NY2d 101). Since the record supports the conclusion that the defendant “failed to prove that the reason[s] given by the prosecutor [were] pretextual” (People v Rose, 258 AD2d 483, 484), the trial court properly sustained the peremptory challenge (see, People v Rodriguez, 259 AD2d 713).

Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Sullivan, J. P., S. Miller, H. Miller and Smith, 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 (F. [802]*802Rivera, J.), rendered November 12, 1997, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In support of his motion pursuant to Batson v Kentucky (476 US 79), the defendant alleged sufficient facts to raise an inference that the prosecutor was engaging in race-based discrimination. In response, the prosecutor offered two race-neutral justifications for the exercise of her peremptory challenge of the prospective juror (see, People v Allen, 86 NY2d 101). Since the record supports the conclusion that the defendant “failed to prove that the reason[s] given by the prosecutor [were] pretextual” (People v Rose, 258 AD2d 483, 484), the trial court properly sustained the peremptory challenge (see, People v Rodriguez, 259 AD2d 713).

Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Sullivan, J. P., S. Miller, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.

People v. Fields, 276 A.D.2d 801, 715 N.Y.S.2d 151, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10995 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

276 A.D.2d 801 (People v. Fields) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related