Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered.
The defendant contends that he was deprived of his right to exercise peremptory challenges when the trial court rejected the defense counsel's reasons for excluding three prospective white jurors during the first round of jury selection (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79; People v. Kern, 75 N.Y.2d 638, cert denied 498 U.S. 824). While a trial court is generally in the best position to evaluate whether a racially neutral explanation for the exercise of a peremptory challenge is pretextual (see, Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352; People v. Dixon, 202 A.D.2d 12), under the circumstances of this case, we agree with the defendant's contention that the defense counsel's explanation with regard to at least one of the jurors in question was not pretextual. Because of our determination, we need not decide whether the reasons proffered by the defense counsel with regard to the two other white jurors were pretextual (see generally, People v. Benson, 184 A.D.2d 517).
In light of our determination, we do not reach the defendant's remaining contentions. Mangano, P.J., Balletta, O'Brien and Hart, JJ., concur.