X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Stein, Garcia and Feinman concur. Judge Fahey dissents in part in an opinion in which Judges Rivera and Wilson concur.

MEMORANDUM The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s challenge for cause to a prospective juror pursuant to CPL 270 (1) (b). When defense counsel directly asked the prospective juror, “if you don’t hear from [defendant], you don’t hear him speak, are you going to hold that against him,” she responded, “I don’t believe that I would.” This response directly refuted any notion that the prospective juror would “hold” defendant’s failure to testify “against him,” i.e., that she would be biased in rendering a decision. Viewing this statement “in totality and in context” (see People v. Warrington, 28 NY3d 1116, 1120 [2016], citing People v. Johnson, 94 NY2d 600, 615 [2000]), the exchange did not, in the first instance, demonstrate “preexisting opinions that might indicate bias” (People v. Arnold, 96 NY2d 358, 363 [2001]; cf. People v. Bludson, 97 NY2d 644, 645 [2001]).1 Thus, the trial court was not required to inquire further “to obtain unequivocal assurance that [the juror] could be fair and impartial” (People v. Wright, 30 NY3d 933, 934 [2017]; People v. Harris, 19 NY3d 679, 685-686 [2012]). We also reject defendant’s challenges to the suppression ruling and the legal sufficiency of the evidence. Defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

More From ALM

With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
View Now
Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
View Now
Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
View Now
December 02, 2024 - December 03, 2024
Scottsdale, AZ

Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers and financiers for the real estate healthcare event of the year!


Learn More
December 11, 2024
Las Vegas, NV

This event shines a spotlight on how individuals and firms are changing the investment advisory industry where it matters most.


Learn More
February 24, 2025 - February 26, 2025
Las Vegas, NV

This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.


Learn More

We are seeking two attorneys with a minimum of two to three years of experience to join our prominent and thriving education law practice in...


Apply Now ›

Description: Fox Rothschild has an opening in the New York office for a Real Estate Litigation Associate with three to six years of commerci...


Apply Now ›

Downtown NY property and casualty defense law firm seeks a Litigation Associate with 3+ years' experience to become a part of our team! You ...


Apply Now ›