Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Sheree Jackson, Defendant–Appellant.
_
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ralph Fabrizio, J. at dismissal motion; Colleen D. Duffy, J. at jury trial and sentencing), rendered November 19, 2012, convicting defendant of offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree, falsely reporting an incident in the third degree, making a punishable false written statement, stalking in the fourth degree, and harassment in the second degree, and sentencing her to an aggregate term of five years' probation, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment, since there were no errors in the grand jury presentation that rose to the level of impairing the integrity of the proceeding. While the prosecutor engaged in some excesses when cross-examining defendant, this was not one of the “rare cases of prosecutorial misconduct” entitling a defendant to the “exceptional remedy of dismissal,” because there is no “showing that, in the absence of the complained-of misconduct, the grand jury might have decided not to indict the defendant” (People v. Thompson, 22 NY3d 687, 699 [2014] [internal quotation marks omitted] ).
The court properly denied defendant's application pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky (476 U.S. 79 [1986] ). The record supports the court's finding that the nondiscriminatory reasons provided by the prosecutor for the challenge in question were not pretextual. This finding is entitled to great deference (see People v. Hernandez, 75 N.Y.2d 350 [1990], affd 500 U.S. 352 [1991] ), particularly because the prosecutor's proffered reasons were based on concerns about the prospective juror's demeanor, which the court had the opportunity to observe (see e. g. People v. Hinds, 93 AD3d 536, 536 [1st Dept 2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 979 [2012] ).
_
CLERK
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 1774
Decided: October 04, 2016
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)