From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Myers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 17, 2003
1 A.D.3d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-01852

Submitted October 17, 2003.

November 17, 2003.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Adler, J.), rendered February 4, 2002, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Stephen J. Pittari, White Plains, N.Y. (Jacqueline F. Oliva of counsel), for appellant.

Jeanine Pirro, District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Lois Cullen Valerio, Valerie A. Livingston, and Richard Longworth Hecht of counsel), for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., DANIEL F. LUCIANO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's Batson challenge ( see Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79) was properly denied since he failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. To establish such a prima facie case, a defendant must demonstrate that members of a cognizable racial group were excluded from the jury venire, and that facts and other relevant circumstances support an inference of impermissible discrimination ( see People v. Childress, 81 N.Y.2d 263, 266; People v. Wilson, 297 A.D.2d 298). The defendant failed to satisfy the second element. His assertion that the prosecutor struck a disproportionate number of black Jamaican venirepersons was insufficient to establish a pattern of purposeful exclusion which would raise an inference of discrimination ( see People v. Childress, supra; People v. Wilson, supra; People v. Collins, 290 A.D.2d 513).

The defendant's contention that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence is without merit. Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15). The defendant shot his girlfriend in the face at close range, and left her to die without seeking medical attention. "It is clear that the crime was `committed under circumstances which evidenced a wanton indifference to human life or a depravity of mind'" ( People v. Kanelos, 107 A.D.2d 764, 765, quoting People v. Register, 60 N.Y.2d 270, 274).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., LUCIANO, SCHMIDT and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Myers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 17, 2003
1 A.D.3d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Myers

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, ETC., respondent, v. ROHAN MYERS, appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 17, 2003

Citations

1 A.D.3d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
767 N.Y.S.2d 266

Citing Cases

People v. Martin

We disagree. "A defendant acts intentionally with respect to a result `when his conscious objective is to…

People v. Boyce

This is important because it allows this court to rely on prior appellate decisions involving similar facts…