Opinion
June 13, 1988
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Delin, J.).
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's argument, the highly detailed description by the victims of their assailant gave the police probable cause to arrest the defendant, who met that description in every crucial detail (see, People v White, 117 A.D.2d 127, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 818; People v Arnette, 111 A.D.2d 861). The suppression court, which saw and heard the witnesses, found that the defendant was given his Miranda warnings and that his oral confession was voluntary. These findings are supported in the record and should not be disturbed (People v Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759, 761).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), we find that the trial testimony was legally sufficient for the jury to find the defendant guilty of the charges upon which he was convicted. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15).
The defendant also argues that the prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge to excuse a black juror was improper. We disagree. The record indicates that the prosecutor proffered a race-neutral explanation for the challenge and thus no error was committed (see, People v Baysden, 128 A.D.2d 795, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 798; Batson v Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79).
We have reviewed the remaining arguments raised by the defendant and find them to be without merit (see, People v McGee, 49 N.Y.2d 48, 59, cert denied sub nom. Waters v New York, 446 U.S. 942). Mangano, J.P., Bracken, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.