From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Johnson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 16, 2006
26 A.D.3d 228 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Summary

holding that the "benefits conferred by CPL 270.15 were not significantly impaired" where the prosecutor "genuinely made a mistake in striking the wrong juror, where defendant did not himself waste a challenge on the subject juror and where defendant took advantage of the court's offer to change his own challenges"

Summary of this case from Ames v. New York

Opinion

7856.

February 16, 2006.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Gregory Carro, J.), rendered November 17, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and seventh degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, 6 to 12 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Jan Hoth of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Patrick J. Hynes of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Sullivan, Williams, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ., Concur.


The court's decision to permit the prosecutor to exercise a peremptory challenge after defendant had completed his challenges does not warrant reversal. Where the record clearly establishes that the prosecutor genuinely made a mistake in striking the wrong juror, where defendant did not himself waste a challenge on the subject juror and where defendant took advantage of the court's offer to change his own challenges, the benefits conferred by CPL 270.15 (2) were not significantly impaired ( see People v. Alston, 88 NY2d 519, 528; see also People v. Kemp, 291 AD2d 236; People v. Levy, 194 AD2d 319, 320-321, appeal dismissed 82 NY2d 890). The prosecutor did not acquire any tactical advantage or place defendant at any kind of disadvantage.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.


Summaries of

People v. Johnson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 16, 2006
26 A.D.3d 228 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

holding that the "benefits conferred by CPL 270.15 were not significantly impaired" where the prosecutor "genuinely made a mistake in striking the wrong juror, where defendant did not himself waste a challenge on the subject juror and where defendant took advantage of the court's offer to change his own challenges"

Summary of this case from Ames v. New York
Case details for

People v. Johnson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DONALD JOHNSON…

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

Date published: Feb 16, 2006

Citations

26 A.D.3d 228 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 1220
808 N.Y.S.2d 549

Citing Cases

Ames v. New York

Even assuming that Petitioner's appellate counsel acted objectively unreasonably by not raising an argument…