People v. Anderson

Citation2008 NY Slip Op 01771,851 N.Y.S.2d 370,48 A.D.3d 825
Decision Date26 February 2008
Docket Number2005-09451.
PartiesTHE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. TYRONE ANDERSON, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the court erred in discharging, sua sponte, certain prospective jurors based on their responses to questions regarding whether they or a relative had been arrested or convicted of a crime. The court properly excused those prospective jurors based on its own questioning which revealed, by their own admissions, that they could not be fair and impartial (see People v Wynder, 41 AD3d 209 [2007]; People v McGhee, 4 AD3d 485 [2004]). The defendant's remaining contention regarding jury selection is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]) and, in any event, is without merit (see People v Johnson, 94 NY2d 600 [2000]).

The defendant's constitutional challenge to his adjudication as a persistent felony offender is without merit. Contrary to the defendant's contention, the procedure under which he was sentenced as a persistent felony offender did not violate either his Sixth Amendment or due process rights (see Penal Law § 70.10 [2]; People v Rivera, 5 NY3d 61 [2005], cert denied 546 US 984 [2005]; People v Jordan, 21 AD3d 1039 [2005]).

Mastro, J.P., Florio, Miller and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • People v. Locenitt
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • January 24, 2018
    ...exercised its discretion in excusing them sua sponte (see People v. Cunningham, 119 A.D.3d at 602, 988 N.Y.S.2d 696 ; People v. Anderson, 48 A.D.3d 825, 826, 851 N.Y.S.2d 370 ; People v. James, 47 A.D.3d 947, 948, 849 N.Y.S.2d 670 ).The defendant's contention that the People failed to adduc......
  • People v. Umana
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • September 28, 2010
    ...261, 748 N.Y.S.2d 379). In any event, this procedure was a proper exercise of the trial court's discretion ( see People v. Anderson, 48 A.D.3d 825, 826, 851 N.Y.S.2d 370;76 A.D.3d 1113People v. Wynder, 41 A.D.3d 209, 839 N.Y.S.2d 14; People v. McGhee, 4 A.D.3d at 486, 772 N.Y.S.2d 344; Peop......
  • People v. Anderson
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals
    • June 27, 2008
  • Matter of Word v. Zambelli
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 26, 2008

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT