People v. Robbins

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Robbins

236 A.D.2d 429, 654 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 998

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 236 A.D.2d 429 (People v. Robbins) 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. Robbins, 236 A.D.2d 429, 654 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 998 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Juviler, J.), rendered June 12, 1995, convicting him of assault in the first degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court’s determination that the proffered explanation for the defense counsel’s peremptory challenge to a juror was pretextual is entitled to great deference on appeal and will not be disturbed where, as here, it is supported by the record (see, e.g., People v Waldo, 221 AD2d 390). We agree with the trial court’s finding that the defendant improperly used his peremptory challenge.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Copertino and Krausman, 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 (Juviler, J.), rendered June 12, 1995, convicting him of assault in the first degree and attempted robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court’s determination that the proffered explanation for the defense counsel’s peremptory challenge to a juror was pretextual is entitled to great deference on appeal and will not be disturbed where, as here, it is supported by the record (see, e.g., People v Waldo, 221 AD2d 390). We agree with the trial court’s finding that the defendant improperly used his peremptory challenge.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Copertino and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 429, 654 N.Y.S.2d 320, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-robbins-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack