Opinion
134 KA 18-00656
03-18-2022
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Xavier A. LOWRY, Defendant-Appellant.
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (WILLIAM CLAUSS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DEREK HARNSBERGER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (WILLIAM CLAUSS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DEREK HARNSBERGER OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, NEMOYER, AND WINSLOW, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of, inter alia, robbery in the first degree ( Penal Law § 160.15 [4] ). Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crimes as charged to the jury, we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v. Danielson , 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348-349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ). Defendant's Batson argument is without merit, particularly given County Court's own observations about the body language and demeanor of the prospective juror (see People v. Johnson , 73 A.D.3d 578, 579, 901 N.Y.S.2d 596 [1st Dept. 2010], lv denied 15 N.Y.3d 893, 912 N.Y.S.2d 582, 938 N.E.2d 1017 [2010] ; People v. Carter , 38 A.D.3d 1256, 1256-1257, 834 N.Y.S.2d 886 [4th Dept. 2007], lv denied 8 N.Y.3d 982, 838 N.Y.S.2d 486, 869 N.E.2d 662 [2007] ). Finally, defendant's Wade argument "is moot inasmuch as th[e relevant] witness did not identify defendant at trial" ( People v. Cormack , 170 A.D.3d 1628, 1629, 96 N.Y.S.3d 803 [4th Dept. 2019], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 979, 113 N.Y.S.3d 655, 137 N.E.3d 25 [2019] ; see CPL 470.05 [1] ; People v. Johnston , 192 A.D.3d 1516, 1520, 145 N.Y.S.3d 233 [4th Dept. 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 972, 150 N.Y.S.3d 703, 172 N.E.3d 815 [2021] ).