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, etc., Respondent, v. Albert CRIDER, Appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered February 15, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the evidence adduced at the Hinton hearing (see, People v. Hinton, 31 N.Y.2d 71, 334 N.Y.S.2d 885, 286 N.E.2d 265, cert. denied 410 U.S. 911, 93 S.Ct. 970, 35 L.Ed.2d 273) supported the trial court's decision to close the courtroom during the testimony of an undercover officer. That officer's supervisor testified that the officer and his team were involved in a long-term narcotics operation targeting members of a group or organization who had committed homicides. The supervisor stated that he believed that this group was responsible for homicides in the area of the defendant's arrest. The undercover officer would, in the near future, be sent into the area of the defendant's arrest for further undercover investigation. Such testimony meets the requirements for courtroom closure under People v. Martinez, 82 N.Y.2d 436, 604 N.Y.S.2d 932, 624 N.E.2d 1027 (see, e.g., People v. Mitchell, 209 A.D.2d 444, 618 N.Y.S.2d 457; People v. Hosien, 204 A.D.2d 658, 612 N.Y.S.2d 203; People v Nieves, 232 A.D.2d 305, 648 N.Y.S.2d 583).
The bulk of the defendant's claims under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 are not preserved for appellate review (see, People v. Allen, 86 N.Y.2d 101, 111, 629 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 653 N.E.2d 1173). In any event, the trial court properly concluded that the prosecution's use of peremptory challenges was not pretextual (see, People v. Richie, 217 A.D.2d 84, 635 N.Y.S.2d 263).
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 10, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
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)