Court Opinion

ID: 9920050
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-18 23:08:34.055232+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:22:34.135872
License: Public Domain

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Grajales, J.), rendered May 2, 1995, convicting him of attempted robbery in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant did not preserve for appellate review his present claim that the court’s response to a juror’s oral inquiry *464was inaccurate and prejudicial, since he failed to raise to the trial court the specific ground he now raises on this appeal (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Balls, 69 NY2d 641, 642; see also, People v Stewart, 81 NY2d 877, 878-879; cf., People v DeRosario, 81 NY2d 801, 803). In any event, the trial court’s response to the juror’s oral inquiry does not warrant reversal as the defendant was not prejudiced thereby (see, People v Agosto, 73 NY2d 963, 967; People v Austin, 199 AD2d 325, 326; People v Beckham, 174 AD2d 748, 750; People v Nevins, 178 AD2d 107, 108).
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the court did not err in dismissing, sua sponte, a prospective juror who was having great difficulty understanding the court’s questions (see, People v Vargas, 88 NY2d 363, 379; People v Mitchell, 224 AD2d 316; People v Scruggs, 201 AD2d 514, 515; see also, People v Decker, 157 NY 186,190-191; People v Torres, 164 AD2d 923, 924; People v Little, 57 Misc 2d 1059, 1061).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., Miller, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.