Opinion
2002-09085.
Decided February 23, 2004.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Honorof, J.), rendered September 19, 2002, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, assault in the second degree (two counts), and grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Martin Geduldig, Hicksville, N.Y., for appellant.
Denis Dillon, District Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Tammy J. Smiley and Denise Pavlides of counsel), for respondent.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT and WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky ( 476 U.S. 79) premised on the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges to strike a black prospective juror is not preserved for appellate review ( see People v. Allen, 86 N.Y.2d 101, 111; People v. Hernandez, 266 A.D.2d 311). In any event, the absence of a complete record of the voir dire precludes any finding that the defendant established a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination ( see People v. Hernandez, supra; People v. Williams, 260 A.D.2d 651; People v. Campanella, 176 A.D.2d 813; People v. Morales, 126 A.D.2d 836).
Further, the absence of a stenographic record does not, per se, require reversal of a defendant's conviction. Reversal is only required if the defendant is prejudiced by the absence of a stenographic record. Under the circumstances of this case, reversal is not warranted as the defendant failed to demonstrate that he was prejudiced by the absence of the minutes from a bench conference ( see People v. Harrison, 85 N.Y.2d 794, 796; People v. Glass, 43 N.Y.2d 283, 286; People v. Eddins, 247 A.D.2d 548).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
SANTUCCI, J.P., FLORIO, SCHMIDT and MASTRO, JJ., concur.