People v. Jenkins
| Decision Date | 22 December 1994 |
| Citation | 84 N.Y.2d 1001,649 N.E.2d 811,622 N.Y.S.2d 509 |
| Parties | , 646 N.E.2d 811 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Glenn JENKINS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
Defendant in this case did not present a prima facie showing of discrimination at any of the three times he raised a Batson objection. To establish a prima facie case of discrimination in the selection of jurors under Batson v. Kentucky 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69, the defendant asserting the claim of unlawful discrimination must show "that the prosecution exercised its peremptory challenges to remove one or more members of a cognizable racial group from the venire and that there exist facts and other relevant circumstances sufficient to raise an inference that the prosecution used its peremptory challenges to exclude potential jurors because of their race" (People v. Childress, 81 N.Y.2d 263, 266, 598 N.Y.S.2d 146, 614 N.E.2d 709). It is not until that prima facie showing has been made that the burden shifts to the prosecution to come forward with a race-neutral explanation for its peremptory challenges (id.).
Here, defendant relied only on the number of African-American jurors challenged to support his request for race-neutral explanations from the prosecution; he offered no showing of facts and circumstances sufficient to raise an inference of a pattern of discrimination. And although a demonstration that the prosecutor has used a "disproportionate number of strikes challenging members of a particular racial group within a venire may be sufficient to create an inference establishing a prima facie claim" (People v. Bolling, 79 N.Y.2d 317, 324, 582 N.Y.S.2d 950, 591 N.E.2d 1136), the defendant's bare assertions here that the prosecutor struck the only African-American on the first panel, three of the six potential African-American jurors in the second round, and two of at least four African-American jurors in the third round--leaving six African-Americans on the jury--was insufficient, without more, to create an inference establishing a prima facie case (see, e.g., People v. Childress, supra, 81 N.Y.2d at 267, 598 N.Y.S.2d 146, 614 N.E.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carmichael v. Chappius
...comparisons that would serve as a basis for a prima facie case of impermissible discrimination (see [People v.] Jenkins, 84 N.Y.2d [1001] at 1003, 622 N.Y.S.2d 509, 646 N.E.2d 811 [ (1994) ] ; Steele, 79 N.Y.2d at 325, 582 N.Y.S.2d 950, 591 N.E.2d 1136 ).Brown I , 97 N.Y.2d at 508, 743 N.Y.......
-
Durant v. Strack
...Id. at 206. Citing People v. Childress, 81 N.Y.2d 263, 598 N.Y.S.2d 146, 614 N.E.2d 709 (1993), and People v. Jenkins, 84 N.Y.2d 1001, 622 N.Y.S.2d 509, 646 N.E.2d 811 (1994), the judge now denied defense counsel's Batson challenge to Ms. Brooks and refused to seat her as a juror. Tr. at Du......
-
Rosario v. Ercole
...situated panelists or other relevant circumstances to raise an inference of a discriminatory purpose (see, People v. Jenkins, 84 N.Y.2d 1001, 622 N.Y.S.2d 509, 646 N.E.2d 811; People v. Bolling, 79 N.Y.2d 317, 582 N.Y.S.2d 950, 591 N.E.2d People v. Rosario, supra, 288 A.D.2d at 143, 733 N.Y......
-
People v. Anthony
...911 [2003] ). Accordingly, we find that the court properly denied defendant's Batson challenge (see People v. Jenkins, 84 N.Y.2d 1001, 1003, 622 N.Y.S.2d 509, 646 N.E.2d 811 [1994] ). Defendant also challenges several of County Court's pretrial rulings, including the court's decision to all......