Opinion
January 25, 1999.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the hearing court properly denied that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress identification testimony on the ground that the police did not have probable cause to arrest him ( see, People v. Carrasquillo, 54 N.Y.2d 248, 254; People v. McRay, 51 N.Y.2d 594; People v. Gittens, 211 A.D.2d 242).
The trial court properly determined that the explanation proffered by the defense counsel for the exercise of his peremptory challenge against a prospective juror was mere pretext offered in an attempt to conceal a racial and/or gender discriminatory intent. That determination is entitled to great deference on appeal and will not be disturbed where, as here, it is supported by the record ( see, Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352; People v. Jupiter, 210 A.D.2d 431; People v. Guess, 208 A.D.2d 559).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review, and in any event, are without merit.
Mangano, P. J., Sullivan, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.