People v. Fortune
This text of 243 A.D.2d 646 (People v. Fortune) 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.
Opinion
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (R. Goldberg, J.), rendered August 4, 1994, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant argues that the People used their peremptory challenges to strike black venirepersons in violation of Batson v Kentucky (476 US 79). However, review of the record reveals that the trial court properly determined that the defendant failed to sustain his ultimate burden of persuasion that the race-neutral reasons proffered by the People were pretextual (see, People v Payne, 88 NY2d 172; People v Allen, 86 NY2d 101).
Although several comments by the prosecutor would have been better left unsaid, the People’s summation did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230).
The defendant’s claim that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at trial because his attorney failed to discuss with him a plea agreement offered by the People concerns matters dehors the record and is not reviewable on direct appeal (see, People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137; People v Richardson, 162 AD2d 557). Ritter, J. P., Friedmann, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
243 A.D.2d 646, 664 N.Y.S.2d 562, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fortune-nyappdiv-1997.