People v. Defina
| Citation | 682 N.Y.S.2d 878,256 A.D.2d 586 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Anthony DEFINA, Appellant. . Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Decision Date | 28 December 1998 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
M. Sue Wycoff, New York, N.Y. (William Ramos of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Roseann B. MacKechnie and Ann Bordley of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hall, J.), rendered May 17, 1995, convicting him of manslaughter in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not denied his constitutional and statutory right to a trial by a jury in whose selection he had participated because the trial court discharged a sworn juror. The inquiry conducted by the court revealed that not only had the juror disregarded its basic instructions, but also that the juror expressed apprehension over the fact that the defendant and he had mutual friends in the neighborhood where they both resided. Moreover, the juror gave ambiguous answers as to whether his anxiety that his identity could become known would affect his ability to be fair and impartial. Accordingly, the court was justified in discharging the juror (see, CPL 270.35; People v. Buford, 69 N.Y.2d 290, 299, 514 N.Y.S.2d 191, 506 N.E.2d 901; People v. White, 204 A.D.2d 750, 613 N.Y.S.2d 34; People v. Clarke, 168 A.D.2d 686, 564 N.Y.S.2d 184).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or, to the extent that they relate to any actual error, do not warrant reversal.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rudenko v Costello
...the claims do not warrant habeas corpus relief for the reasons stated in the opinion of the Appellate Division, People v. DeFina, ___ A.D.2d ___, 682 N.Y.S.2d 878 (2d Dep't 1998), and the memorandum of law filed by the District The issue raised in petitioner's collateral attack on the judgm......
-
Rudenko v. Costello
...the claims do not warrant habeas corpus relief for the reasons stated in the opinion of the Appellate Division, People v. DeFina, 256 A.D.2d 586, 682 N.Y.S.2d 878 (2d Dep't 1998), and the memorandum of law filed by the District The issue raised in petitioner's collateral attack on the judgm......
-
People v. Hernandez
...that he could reach a fair and impartial decision ( see CPL 270.35; People v. Lennon, 37 A.D.3d 853, 830 N.Y.S.2d 770; People v. Defina, 256 A.D.2d 586, 682 N.Y.S.2d 878; People v. White, 204 A.D.2d 750, 613 N.Y.S.2d 34; People v. Galvin, 112 A.D.2d 1090, 492 N.Y.S.2d 836). The Supreme Cour......
- People v. Charles