From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Eure

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 23, 1999
264 A.D.2d 628 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

September 23, 1999

Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John Collins, J., at summary denial of motion; Joseph Fisch, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered June 10, 1997 and June 6, 1997, respectively, convicting each defendant of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing Eure, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 9 to 18 years, and sentencing Daye, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Erica M. Fitzgerald for respondent.

Todd A. Landau and Jonathan Svetkey for defendant-appellant.

ELLERIN, P.J., TOM, MAZZARELLI, WALLACH, LERNER, JJ.


Contrary to defendant Daye's contention, the verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility.

The court properly granted the People's objection, made pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky ( 476 U.S. 79), to a defense peremptory challenge. Defendants' various claims concerning theBatson inquiry conducted by the court are unpreserved (see, People v. Payne, 88 N.Y.2d 172), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the court effectively complied with Batson's three-step analysis and, after properly finding a prima facie case of discrimination, properly revisited and revised its initial ruling to conclude that the defense failed to articulate any reason, much less a race-neutral one the challenge at issue.

Summary denial of Daye's motion to suppress identification testimony as the fruit of an unlawful detention was proper. The motion court was in possession of sufficient information to determine that there was no legal basis for the motion in that there was no post-detention identification procedure.

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.

Motion seeking to file supplemental brief denied.

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


Summaries of

People v. Eure

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 23, 1999
264 A.D.2d 628 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Eure

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ADOLPH EURE, THE…

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

Date published: Sep 23, 1999

Citations

264 A.D.2d 628 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
696 N.Y.S.2d 112