AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. MARK COLEMAN, appellant.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly denied his Batson challenge (see, Batson v. Kennedy, 476 U.S. 79). The prosecutor's reason for challenging the subject juror was race-neutral and was supported by the record (cf., People v. McIndoe, 277 A.D.2d 252). The defendant failed to demonstrate that the reason given by the prosecutor was pretextual (see, People v. Payne, 88 N.Y.2d 171, 182; People v. Allen, 86 N.Y.2d 101, 109-110; People v. Ritchie, 217 A.D.2d 84, 87).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or are without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, TOWNES and COZIER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

PEOPLE v. COLEMAN
(Oct 22, 2001)