People v. Elias

If a court finds that a juror is grossly unqualified to serve in a case, or has engaged in misconduct of a substantial nature, the court must discharge such juror (see CPL 270.35; People v Buford, 69 NY2d 290 , 299-300 [1987]). In making a determination of whether a juror is grossly unqualified, the trial court must conduct a probing, tactful inquiry into the specific circumstances, and must question each allegedly unqualified juror individually in camera in the presence of the attorneys and the defendant (see People v Gibian, 76 AD3d 583 [2010]; People v Arena, 70 AD3d 1044 [2010]; People v Foddrell, 65 AD3d 1375 , 1377 [2009]; People v Littebrant, 55 AD3d 1151 [2008]; People v Dombroff, 44 AD3d 785 , 787 [2007]; People v Stephens, 22 AD3d 691 [2005]; People v Simon, 224 AD2d 458 [1996]; People v Mack, 224 AD2d 448 , 449 [1996]; People v Horney, 112 AD2d 841 , 843 [1985]). Where this has occurred, the Supreme Court’s determination will be accorded latitude and great deference, and should be set aside only where the error is manifest (see People v Littebrant, 55 AD3d 1151 [2008]).

Here, the record supports the Supreme Court’s determination

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302 , 305 [1981]; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 , 83-86 [1982]). Dillon, J.E, Eng, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.