From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Williams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 7, 2003
301 A.D.2d 369 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2736

January 7, 2003.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Edward Davidowitz, J.), rendered August 22, 2000, as amended October 24, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree, assault in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Cheryl D. Harris, for respondent.

Jojo Annobil, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sullivan, Rosenberger, Gonzalez, JJ.


Defendant's application pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky ( 476 U.S. 79) was properly denied on the ground that defendant did not establish a prima facie case of purposeful racial discrimination (see People v. Brown, 97 N.Y.2d 500, 507-508). Defendant's numerical argument was unconvincing, and his efforts to portray various panelists challenged by the prosecutor as having supposedly pro-prosecution backgrounds was unfounded. For example, the one panelist with a relative in law enforcement also had a relative who had been convicted of a felony, imprisoned and deported.

The court's very brief mention, in connection with its identification charge, of the testimony of two witnesses did not unfairly marshal the evidence (see People v. Culhane, 45 N.Y.2d 757, 758, cert denied 439 U.S. 1047).

There was a sufficient foundation for the prosecutor's comment on defendant's failure to call his girlfriend and her father as witnesses (see People v. Alston, 225 A.D.2d 453, 454, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 932). The court's instruction, made in response to defendant's objection to the summation comment, and its instruction on the same subject during its main charge, made it clear to the jury that defendant had no obligation to present any evidence, and never suggested that the jury should draw any unfavorable inference from defendant's failure to call witnesses (see People v. Ruine, 258 A.D.2d 278, lv denied 93 N.Y.2d 929).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Williams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 7, 2003
301 A.D.2d 369 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ROBERT WILLIAMS…

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

Date published: Jan 7, 2003

Citations

301 A.D.2d 369 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
755 N.Y.S.2d 15

Citing Cases

Williams v. Burge

We note that the prosecution indicated its willingness to respond to a Batson challenge at that time, the…

Williams v. Burge

Williams appealed the judgment and conviction, alleging that he was denied his Equal Protection rights under…