People v. Lovett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lovett

251 A.D.2d 599, 673 N.Y.S.2d 939, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7508

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

DecidedJune 22, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D.2d 599 (People v. Lovett) 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. Lovett, 251 A.D.2d 599, 673 N.Y.S.2d 939, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7508 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered June 20, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

There is no merit to the defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in accepting the People’s explanation for challenging a black venireperson during jury selection. The court properly found that the race-neutral reason proffered for the challenge was not pretextual (see, People v Richie, 217 AD2d 84). Pizzuto, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Luciano, 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, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered June 20, 1997, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

There is no merit to the defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in accepting the People’s explanation for challenging a black venireperson during jury selection. The court properly found that the race-neutral reason proffered for the challenge was not pretextual (see, People v Richie, 217 AD2d 84). Pizzuto, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 599, 673 N.Y.S.2d 939, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lovett-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack