Opinion
October 8, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic Massaro, J.).
The court properly seated two prospective jurors who had been challenged by defendant. The court's finding of prima facie discrimination was proper since the record shows, inter alia, that jurors with similar backgrounds as these Caucasian jurors had not been peremptorily challenged by defense counsel ( see, People v. Bolling, 79 N.Y.2d 317, 324). The court's finding that defense counsel's race-neutral reasons were pretextual are entitled to great deference ( People v. Hernandez, 75 N.Y.2d 350, aff'd 500 U.S. 352). We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining arguments on this issue.
Defendant's contention, that the court improperly curtailed the cross-examination of the complainant and thus deprived him of his right to present a defense, is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v. Martinez, 214 A.D.2d 429, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 738), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review it, we would find that the court properly exercised its discretion in limiting questioning of the complainant on a collateral issue for which an unsatisfactory basis was asserted ( People v. Sorge, 301 N.Y. 198; People v. Melcherts, 225 A.D.2d 357, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 881). Were we to find that the court's ruling was erroneous, we would find such error to be harmless ( see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
Defendant's claim that the court should have charged the jury on the defense of justification under the theory of nondeadly physical force as well as deadly physical force is unpreserved for appellate review, and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that there was no reasonable view of the evidence to support such a charge ( People v. Samuels, 198 A.D.2d 384, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 930).
Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Williams, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.