People v. Rivera

• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Citation: People v. Rivera, 640 N.Y.S.2d 483, 225 A.D.2d 392 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
• Decision Date: 19 March 1996
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Carlos RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant.

Page 483

640 N.Y.S.2d 483

225 A.D.2d 392

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Carlos RIVERA, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division First Department.

March 19, 1996.

Alan Gadlin, for respondent.

Frank J. Loss, for defendant-appellant.

Before MURPHY, P.J., and MILONAS, ROSENBERGER, ROSS and MAZZARELLI, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Andrias, J.), rendered March 8, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of attempted murder in the first degree, three counts of attempted murder in the second degree, two counts of attempted aggravated assault upon a police officer, and one count each of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the second degree, criminal use of a firearm in the first degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the second and third degrees and reckless endangerment in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 17 years to life on the attempted first-degree murder convictions, 8 to 24 years on the attempted second-degree murder and criminal use of a firearm convictions, 3 to 9 years on the attempted aggravated assault convictions, and 2 to 6 years on the reckless endangerment conviction, to run consecutively with concurrent terms of 3 to 9 years on the first-degree robbery conviction, and 2 to 6 years on the second-degree robbery and weapon possession convictions, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant failed to meet his burden, on the third step of his Batson challenge, of showing that the reasons offered by the prosecutor for his challenge of a Hispanic juror were pretextual (see, People v. Allen, 86 N.Y.2d 101, 629 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 653 N.E.2d 1173; Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765, 115 S.Ct. 1769, 131 L.Ed.2d 834). With one exception, defendant failed to argue that...