—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.), rendered February 7, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly exercised its discretion by prohibiting defendant from establishing that the arresting officer found a crack pipe on the individual arrested with defendant. This evidence was irrelevant. Even if it were marginally relevant to defendant’s claim that he was using but not selling drugs, any minimal probative value was outweighed by its potential to confuse the jurors (see, People v Harrell,
The court’s instruction on the nature of the jury’s deliberative process was sufficiently balanced and was not coercive (see, People v Alvarez,