From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 13, 2009
66 A.D.3d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 2005-06936.

October 13, 2009.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), rendered July 8, 2005, convicting him of murder in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Jonathan M. Kratter of counsel), for appellant.

Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Howard B. Goodman of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Rivera, J.P., Florio, Eng and Leventhal, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the Supreme Court erred in denying his Batson challenge ( see Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79) because the prosecutor's explanations for striking a black female prospective juror were pretextual. However, the defendant's challenge was properly denied since he failed to satisfy his burden of demonstrating, under the third prong of the Batson analysis, that the facially race-neutral and gender-neutral explanations given by the prosecutor were a pretext for discrimination ( see People v Payne, 88 NY2d 172, 181).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 13, 2009
66 A.D.3d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

People v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LARRY SMITH, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 13, 2009

Citations

66 A.D.3d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 7445
885 N.Y.S.2d 914

Citing Cases

People v. Peter Allen

Since the prosecutor offered a gender-neutral explanation for the questioned peremptory challenges, the issue…