Opinion
December 13, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert Cohen, J.).
Defendant failed to preserve his present claim that the court, following its sua sponte request that the People furnish race-neutral explanations for some of their challenges, should have requested such explanations for certain earlier challenges (People v Duncan, 177 A.D.2d 187, 192, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1048). In any event, we find insufficient support in the record for the court's implicit, sua sponte, finding of prima facie discrimination, given the racial composition of the available panel (see, People v Burress, 164 A.D.2d 825, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 938).
We perceive no error with respect to the Wade hearing, the People having presented ample evidence that the station house confrontation between defendant and a witness was accidental and spontaneous. Even assuming that defendant had the right to call additional police officers as defense witnesses (see, People v Chipp, 75 N.Y.2d 327, 338, cert denied 498 U.S. 833), defendant made no such request, and his argument addressed to the sufficiency of the People's proof at the hearing did not operate as such a request (cf., People v Borrello, 52 N.Y.2d 952, 953).
We have reviewed defendant's argument concerning a purported pro se speedy trial motion and find it without merit (People v Lomax, 50 N.Y.2d 351; People v Rodriguez, 50 N.Y.2d 553).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger and Asch, JJ.