From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Hassell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 10, 1989
149 A.D.2d 530 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

April 10, 1989

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Baker, J.).


Ordered that the case is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, to hear and report on the prosecutor's exercise of peremptory challenges, and the appeal is held in abeyance in the interim; the County Court is to file its report with all convenient speed.

The defendant claims that the prosecution's use of its peremptory challenges to systematically exclude black venirepersons from the jury violated his rights under both the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments (see, Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79; Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314; McCray v. Abrams, 750 F.2d 1113).

After jury selection had been completed, during which the prosecutor exercised 7 peremptory challenges, 2 directed at black venirepersons, the defense counsel moved for a mistrial "on the ground that the District Attorney has arbitrarily and improperly used his peremptory challenges to exclude each and every black person who was examined". He explained: "The defendant is black and this shows a pattern on the part of the District Attorney of Nassau County. As recently as * * * March of [1985] the District Attorney of Nassau County did the same thing in the indictment of the People versus Eric Baysden; and that's the argument" (emphasis added). The court observed that of the 6 black venirepersons, 4 had been excused on their request and the remaining 2 were peremptorily struck by the prosecutor, and denied the application. The motion was renewed after the verdict and was again denied.

Under the circumstances, the defendant made out a prima facie case of racial discrimination (see, Batson v. Kentucky, supra). Although Batson v. Kentucky (supra) was not yet decided when this case was tried, it must be given retroactive application (see, Griffith v. Kentucky, supra). Accordingly, the matter is remitted for an evidentiary hearing, during which time the appeal from the judgment of conviction will be held in abeyance (see, People v. Howard, 128 A.D.2d 804; People v. Gregory ZZ., 134 A.D.2d 814; People v. Knight, 134 A.D.2d 845; People v. Lawson, 136 A.D.2d 929; People v. Mims, 140 A.D.2d 929). Kunzeman, J.P., Kooper, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Hassell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 10, 1989
149 A.D.2d 530 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

People v. Hassell

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ANTONIO HASSELL…

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

Date published: Apr 10, 1989

Citations

149 A.D.2d 530 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Citing Cases

People v. Sandy

The Supreme Court is to file its report with all convenient speed. We find merit to the defendant's…

People v. Gallagher

Accordingly, we reject the defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial by reason of the trial…