From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Santo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 28, 1997
241 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

July 28, 1997

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (DeRiggi, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that there was legally sufficient evidence adduced at trial to establish the element of"substantial pain" (People v. Rojas, 61 N.Y.2d 726, 727) and the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The defendant contends that the court's "summary denial" of his Batson challenge (see, Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79) was incorrect and was based upon the court's erroneous ruling that a prima facie showing of purposeful discrimination had not been established. We find that the defendant failed to make the requisite prima facie showing (see, People v. Childress, 81 N.Y.2d 263, 266).

The court did not err in denying the defendant's motion pursuant to CPL 330.30.

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Ritter, J. P., Sullivan, Santucci and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Santo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 28, 1997
241 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

People v. Santo

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ALONZO SANTO, Appellant

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

Date published: Jul 28, 1997

Citations

241 A.D.2d 560 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
663 N.Y.S.2d 993

Citing Cases

Figueroa v. Hernandez

Finally, the court rejects petitioner's argument, first raised in his reply memorandum of law, that…