Ordered that the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, to hear and report on the prosecutor's exercise of peremptory challenges against black potential jurors at the trial of Indictment Number 3418/88, and the appeals are held in abeyance in the interim; the Supreme Court, Queens County, is to file its report with all convenient speed.
During jury selection, the defendant's counsel objected to the prosecutor's exercise of peremptory challenges. It appears that the prosecutor used 5 of his 7 peremptory challenges to exclude 5 out of 8 black venire persons, which was sufficient to establish, prima facie, that the prosecutor exercised his peremptory challenges in a racially discriminatory manner (see, People v Newman, 173 A.D.2d 743). The Supreme Court rejected his claim and did not require the prosecutor to state, on the record, the reason for the exclusion of each potential juror. Accordingly, the matter is remitted for an evidentiary hearing for the prosecutor to offer race-neutral explanations for his challenges, if he is able to do so (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79; People v Jenkins, 75 N.Y.2d 550; People v Newman, 173 A.D.2d 743; People v Benson, 173 A.D.2d 720; People v Blunt, 162 A.D.2d 86; People v Bozella, 150 A.D.2d 471). Kunzeman, J.P., Sullivan, Balletta and O'Brien, JJ., concur.