PEOPLE v. WILLINGHAM

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's Batson motion ( see, Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79) was properly denied as he failed to make the requisite prima facie showing of discrimination. It is incumbent upon the party mounting a Batson challenge to articulate and develop all of the grounds supporting the claim, both factual and legal, during the colloquy in which the objection is raised and discussed ( see, People v. Childress, 81 N.Y.2d 263, 268). In this case, the defendant completely failed to satisfy his obligation to articulate on the record a sound factual basis for his Batson claim against the prosecution's exercise of its peremptory challenges. Other than his bare assertion that the prosecution had "no good reason" for exercising its peremptory challenges against the black venirepersons, the defendant noted only that the prosecutor had exercised eight peremptory challenges against black venirepersons. In the absence of a record demonstrating other facts or circumstances supporting a prima facie case, the trial court correctly found that the defendant had failed to establish a pattern of purposeful exclusion sufficient to raise an inference of racial discrimination ( see, People v. Jenkins, 84 N.Y.2d 1001, 1003; People v. Ware, 245 A.D.2d 85; People v. Robert G., 241 A.D.2d 499; People v. Lowe, 234 A.D.2d 564, 565; People v. Vidal, 212 A.D.2d 553, 554).

Sullivan, J.P., Pizzuto, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.