Opinion
March 26, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, (Ira Globerman, J.).
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility and reliability of identification testimony. There was ample evidence supporting the conviction for robbery in the first degree committed while armed with a deadly weapon (Penal Law § 160.15), including evidence that defendant shot the victim. The weight and sufficiency of the evidence supporting this count was not undermined by the jury's verdict acquitting defendant on certain other counts, and defendant's argument to the contrary would require "impermissible invasion of the jury's deliberative processes" ( People v. Rivera, 201 A.D.2d 377, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 875; see also, People v. Williams, 239 A.D.2d 271, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 899).
Defendant failed to make a prima facie showing before the trial court that the prosecution was using its peremptory challenges in a racially discriminatory fashion. Given the racial composition of the panel, the prosecution's use of peremptory challenges was not so racially disproportionate as to establish a prima facie showing without non-numerical evidence of discrimination, and defendant did not advance any such nonnumerical claims before the trial court ( Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79; People v. Childress, 81 N.Y.2d 263; People v. Bolling, 79 N.Y.2d 317, 325).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion, and we reject defendant's argument that the sentence was based on impermissible criteria.
Concur — Lerner, P. J., Milonas, Rosenberger, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.