From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gibbs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 28, 1999
267 A.D.2d 179 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

December 28, 1999

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Leibovitz, J.), rendered January 27, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2+ to 5 years, unanimously affirmed.

Donna Krone, for Respondent.

Katheryne Martone, for Defendant-Appellant.

SULLIVAN, J.P., NARDELLI, RUBIN, ANDRIAS, FRIEDMAN, JJ.


When a sworn juror was discharged, based upon a ground not known before the juror was sworn, and 12 jurors had been sworn but no alternates had yet been selected, the court properly resumed "regular" jury selection, in accordance with CPL 270.15(4), in order to replace that discharged juror, rather than replacing the discharged juror by selecting an alternate for that purpose (see,People v. Roberts, 236 A.D.2d 233, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 836; see also,People v. Barr, 212 A.D.2d 485). A logical reading of the statutory scheme for jury selection leads us to the conclusion that resumption of jury selection and "lateral" entry of a new regular juror is permissible in this situation (cf., People v. Alston, 88 N.Y.2d 519, 526-527). Defendant had exhausted his peremptory challenges and, although not required, the court provided defendant and the People with one additional peremptory challenge.

The court properly found that the prosecutor provided a race-neutral, nonpretextual explanation for peremptorily striking a prospective juror. The court's findings on this subject are entitled to great deference (People v. Hernandez, 75 N.Y.2d 350, 356-57, affd 500 U.S. 352), especially where the explanations involve matters of demeanor (see, People v. Artis, 262 A.D.2d 215, 694 N.Y.S.2d 5). We note that the court's own observations confirmed, to some extent, that the juror was displaying inattentiveness, and that the court was entitled to credit the prosecutor's representation that he had noticed other signs of inattentiveness.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Gibbs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 28, 1999
267 A.D.2d 179 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Gibbs

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RONALD GIBBS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 28, 1999

Citations

267 A.D.2d 179 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
701 N.Y.S.2d 27

Citing Cases

Valentine v. State of New York

We conclude that defendant did not satisfy his burden of establishing that the race-neutral reason offered by…

People v. Valentine

We conclude that defendant did not satisfy his burden of establishing that the race-neutral reason offered by…