From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Dyce

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 2, 1993
196 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

August 2, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial because the prosecutor improperly exercised a peremptory challenge to exclude a female, black prospective juror (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79) is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Bowman, 185 A.D.2d 891, 892; People v Holland, 179 A.D.2d 822, 824; People v Campanella, 176 A.D.2d 813), and we decline to reach this claim in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

We have examined the defendant's contention that he was deprived of his right to be present during the impaneling of the jury when the court conducted side-bar conferences, outside of his presence, with 10 prospective jurors with respect to their ability to be unbiased and impartial (see, CPL 260.20; People v Antommarchi, 80 N.Y.2d 247), and find it to be without merit (see, People v Mitchell, 80 N.Y.2d 519; cf., People v Sloan, 79 N.Y.2d 386). Sullivan, J.P., Balletta, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Dyce

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 2, 1993
196 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

People v. Dyce

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DAVID DYCE, Also Known…

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

Date published: Aug 2, 1993

Citations

196 A.D.2d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
601 N.Y.S.2d 845

Citing Cases

People v. Chiriboga

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant's contention that the prosecutor improperly exercised…