A New York judge on Thursday denied a motion to dismiss the five remaining criminal charges against Harvey Weinstein, saying attorneys for the disgraced movie mogul had not shown that grand jury proceedings in the case were tainted by police and prosecutor misconduct.

Manhattan Supreme Court Justice James Burke's ruling followed a pivotal hearing Thursday morning on a motion by Weinstein's attorney, Benjamin Brafman, to dismiss the case. Brafman had argued that prosecutors failed to present a range of exculpatory evidence to the panel, including evidence that Weinstein had engaged in a long-term consensual relationship with an alleged victim.

In his decision, Burke said prosecutors had presented evidence in a fair manner and were not obligated to search for evidence favorable to Weinstein's defense at the grand jury stage.

“The court's review of the grand jury minutes shows that the presentation was legally and procedurally proper, and that the people presented evidence in a fair manner,” Burke wrote in a six-page order. “Nor did the people provide a misleading account of the relationship between the defendant and the complainants.”

He also found no basis for Weinstein's allegations of police misconduct or that the case had been influenced by “political pressure” within the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. Burke also denied Weinstein's request for an evidentiary hearing involving the friend of an accuser, whom the defense argued could provide corroborating evidence of the supposedly consensual relationship between Weinstein and his alleged victim.

The parties are next expected to appear in court March 7 for pretrial hearings.

A spokesman for District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. would not to comment on Thursday's ruling.

Weinstein faces two charges of predatory sexual assault, which carry a maximum penalty of life in prison, first- and third-degree rape, and a criminal sex act in the third degree.

In October, Burke dismissed one charge amid revelations that a New York City police detective did not tell prosecutors that a witness had provided him with an account that contradicted that of Lucia Evans, who claimed that Weinstein forced her to give him oral sex in 2004.

Brafman, of Brafman & Associates, then moved to dismiss the entire indictment, arguing that the whole case against his client was flawed. On Thursday, Brafman said he was “obviously disappointed” by Burke's ruling and turned his attention to the upcoming trial.

“Nothing in the court's ruling, however, removes the flawed theory of this case that we intend to vigorously defend at trial, where we are confident that Mr. Weinstein will be completely exonerated,” Brafman said.