PEOPLE v. RODRIGUEZ (1999)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Jose RODRIGUEZ, appellant.

Decided: March 15, 1999

CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., DAVID S. RITTER, WILLIAM C. THOMPSON and GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, JJ.

Stuart J. Grossman, Forest Hills, N.Y., for appellant. Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Maryam N'HaMargo Lipkansky of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cooperman, J.), rendered February 3, 1997, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that he is entitled to a new trial because the court incorrectly dismissed two prospective jurors, one of whom advised the court during voir dire that he was scheduled to undergo long-awaited surgery in two days' time. We disagree and find that the court's dismissals of the prospective jurors were proper exercises of discretion (see generally, People v. Page, 72 N.Y.2d 69, 73, 531 N.Y.S.2d 83, 526 N.E.2d 783; cf., People v. Oyewole, 220 A.D.2d 624, 633 N.Y.S.2d 41).

The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2] ) and we decline to review them in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

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.

Go To Learn About The Law