People v. Daniels, 59 A.D.3d 730

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The trial court did not err in discharging a sworn juror over the defendant‘s objection. The record demonstrates that the court properly engaged in a thorough and searching inquiry of the juror (see People v Dukes, 8 NY3d 952 [2007]) and correctly discharged her as being “grossly unqualified” (CPL 270.35 [1]) based upon the juror‘s statement that financial concerns would prevent her from giving her undivided attention to the case (see People v Thomas, 13 AD3d 259 [2004]; People v Cook, 275 AD2d 1020 [2000]; People v Huntley, 237 AD2d 533 [1997]; People v Bolden, 197 AD2d 528 [1993]). Florio, J.P., Covello, Balkin and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Daniels

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

Date Published: Feb 24, 2009

Citations: 59 A.D.3d 730; 875 N.Y.S.2d 494

Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.