From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Childress

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 4, 1991
177 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

November 4, 1991

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


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention on appeal, the court did not err in concluding, after a hearing, that the defendant was competent to stand trial (see, CPL 730.10). The ultimate determination of this issue lies with the court (People v Bolling, 114 A.D.2d 416, 417). Upon our review of the record, we are satisfied that the People sustained their burden of proving by a preponderance of the credible evidence that the defendant is not an incapacited person (People v. Orama, 150 A.D.2d 505; People v. Allen, 135 A.D.2d 823; People v. Breeden, 115 A.D.2d 484; People v. Santos, 43 A.D.2d 73). Further, in consideration of the conflicting evidence of competency, it cannot be said that the hearing court's determination was against the weight of the credible evidence (People v. Orama, supra, at 506; People v Breeden, supra; People v. Bolling, supra; People v. Carl, 58 A.D.2d 948, revd on other grounds 46 N.Y.2d 806).

The trial court did not err in denying the defense request for a jury charge on the lesser included offense of criminal trespass in the second degree. No reasonable view of the evidence supports a finding that the defendant committed the lesser included offense but not the greater (see, People v. Glover, 57 N.Y.2d 61, 63).

The defendant has failed to substantiate his claim that the prosecutor's use of his peremptory challenges to exclude black venirepersons from the jury violated his rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments (see, Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79; Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314), since the voir dire proceedings have not been made available as part of the record on appeal (see, People v. Campanella, 176 A.D.2d 813).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either without merit or unpreserved for appellate review. Sullivan, J.P., Balletta, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Childress

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 4, 1991
177 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Childress

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. CRAIG CHILDRESS…

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

Date published: Nov 4, 1991

Citations

177 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
576 N.Y.S.2d 143

Citing Cases

People v. Piermont

However, the defendant has not provided this court with a record of the voir dire proceedings. Thus, there is…

People v. Mendez

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. The law is well settled that the determination of whether a defendant…