People v. Haywood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Haywood

251 A.D.2d 255, 675 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7812

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

DecidedJune 30, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 255 (People v. Haywood) 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. Haywood, 251 A.D.2d 255, 675 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7812 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald Zweibel, J.), rendered April 24, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record supports the trial court’s express and implied findings that the prosecutor provided race-neutral, nonpretextual reasons for the discharge of six African-American prospective jurors (see, People v Wint, 237 AD2d 195, lv denied 89 NY2d 1103). We perceive no basis for disturbing the trial court’s evaluation of the prosecutor’s explanations for the peremptory challenges (see, People v Hernandez, 75 NY2d 350, affd 500 US 352). Such evaluations are entitled to considerable deference, particularly where matters of demeanor are involved. Defendant, as the party objecting to the peremptory strikes, failed to carry his burden of proving the pretextual nature of the challenges (People v Payne, 88 NY2d 172, 181; People v Bryant, 247 AD2d 229). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Wallach, 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 April 24, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The record supports the trial court’s express and implied findings that the prosecutor provided race-neutral, nonpretextual reasons for the discharge of six African-American prospective jurors (see, People v Wint, 237 AD2d 195, lv denied 89 NY2d 1103). We perceive no basis for disturbing the trial court’s evaluation of the prosecutor’s explanations for the peremptory challenges (see, People v Hernandez, 75 NY2d 350, affd 500 US 352). Such evaluations are entitled to considerable deference, particularly where matters of demeanor are involved. Defendant, as the party objecting to the peremptory strikes, failed to carry his burden of proving the pretextual nature of the challenges (People v Payne, 88 NY2d 172, 181; People v Bryant, 247 AD2d 229). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 255, 675 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-haywood-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack