In People v. Luciano , Ruben Luciano was charged with multiple crimes after allegedly shooting a man named Angel Rodriquez.
When Luciano's lawyer used up "peremptory challenges" -- and objected to eight individuals serving on the jury -- prosecutors required defense counsel to give a "gender-neutral reason" for its attempt to remove all the women.
When it found two of those challenges had been discriminatorily applied, the Bronx County Supreme Court refused to reinstate them, finding they had been forfeited due to the misconduct.
After he was convicted of "criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and assault in the second degree," and sentenced up to 15 years, he appealed to the Appellate Division, First Department, which reversed on the grounds that "each party 'must be allowed' the statutorily prescribed number of challenges."
On appeal, the New York State Court of Appeals concluded that while forfeiture of peremptory challenges was a "permissible remedy to be exercised in a trial judge's discretion," it is a sanction which must sparingly issue. And before that kind of relief may be granted, a trial judge must consider "whether the challenged juror is available to be reseated," whether there appears to be a "pattern of discrimination," and the number of challenges remaining.
Since the Bronx County Supreme Court failed to take the relevant factors into consideration, forfeiture of Luciano's peremptory strikes was "reversible error," which entitled him to a new trial.
Guess you got lucky, Luciano!
To download a copy of the Court of Appeals's decision, please use this link: People v. Luciano