Legal Opinion

People v. Luciano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided August 2, 2007PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Malone, J.

In this case of apparent first impression, we are asked to determine, in a situation where the use of peremptory challenges is found to be discriminatory, known as a Batson or reverse-Batson violation (Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79 [1986]), whether forfeiture of the peremptory challenges used to unsuccessfully strike the prospective jurors is an appropriate remedy. In the absence of any present appellate or statutory authority, we cannot endorse the forfeiture of improperly used peremptory strikes as a penalty for a Batson or revevse-Batson violation. Accordingly,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. People v. IrizarryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  3. People v. PerezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  4. People v. SteansAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  5. People v. ButlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Robar v. LaBudaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  2. People v. WilsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API