Opinion
May 2, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Frank Torres, J.).
After the prosecution complained that defense counsel had exercised his peremptory challenges in a discriminatory manner against women, the court questioned defense counsel with respect to the reason for the challenges to four women in the next round. The court then properly summarily rejected as pretextual the explanations offered and re-seated those women, since defense counsel's explanations for the use of his peremptory challenges were insufficient to rebut the prosecutor's prima facie showing of purposeful discrimination against women.
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), we find that the evidence was sufficient as a matter of law to support every element of the crimes charged. Moreover, upon an independent review of the facts, we find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). As the People concede, however, the conviction for assault in the second degree should be vacated because it is a lesser included offense of second degree robbery (see, People v Dillon, 201 A.D.2d 265, 266, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 871).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion (see, People v Delgado, 80 N.Y.2d 780). We have considered defendant's other contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.