PEOPLE v. COUSIN (2000)

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), rendered August 8, 1997, convicting him of rape in the first degree and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contentions on appeal, the fact that the prosecutor peremptorily challenged the only black potential juror to be questioned during voir dire was insufficient, without more, to establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination (see, Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69;  People v. Payne, 88 N.Y.2d 172, 643 N.Y.S.2d 949, 666 N.E.2d 542;  People v. Bolling, 79 N.Y.2d 317, 582 N.Y.S.2d 950, 591 N.E.2d 1136;  People v. Blackford, 256 A.D.2d 619, 683 N.Y.S.2d 577).   The defendant did not articulate a sound factual basis for his Batson claim, as he failed to establish the existence of facts and other relevant circumstances giving rise to an inference of purposeful discrimination (see, People v. Childress, 81 N.Y.2d 263, 268, 598 N.Y.S.2d 146, 614 N.E.2d 709;  People v. Willingham, 253 A.D.2d 533, 676 N.Y.S.2d 883).

The People's disclosure of a statement by a witness who spoke to the victim after the rape, which the defendant asserted was Brady material, was made in time to afford the defendant an opportunity to use it effectively (see, Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215;  People v. Perkins, 227 A.D.2d 572, 643 N.Y.S.2d 173).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.