PEOPLE v. ARTIS (1999)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered June 9, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

 The court properly denied defendant's Batson challenge (Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69).   The record supports the court's conclusion that the reasons proffered by the prosecutor for exercising a peremptory challenge against the prospective juror in question, that she seemed bored and disinterested in the proceedings, were race-neutral and non-pretextual (see, People v. Manigo, 165 A.D.2d 660, 560 N.Y.S.2d 38).   A fair reading of the court's Batson ruling, viewed as a whole, establishes that it took the juror's demeanor into consideration, and such a determination is entitled to great deference on appeal (see, People v. Haywood, 251 A.D.2d 255, 675 N.Y.S.2d 527, lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 898, 680 N.Y.S.2d 62, 702 N.E.2d 847).

 The court properly exercised its discretion in discharging a sworn juror who was unable to continue her jury service because of illness.   After a thorough inquiry, in which the juror stated that it was unlikely that she could return the next day, the juror's future availability could not be determined.   Further, the other jurors would have been inconvenienced by a delay because the jury was about to be charged and the jurors had made their personal arrangements for possible sequestration (see, People v. Jones, 253 A.D.2d 665, 677 N.Y.S.2d 463, lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 1050, 685 N.Y.S.2d 429, 708 N.E.2d 186;  People v. Graves, 243 A.D.2d 275, 662 N.Y.S.2d 319, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 834, 667 N.Y.S.2d 688, 690 N.E.2d 497).   Since the court's ruling was in full accordance with the standards set forth in People v. Page, 72 N.Y.2d 69, 531 N.Y.S.2d 83, 526 N.E.2d 783, we need not decide any of the issues raised by defendant concerning the applicability, interpretation, and constitutionality of the recently enacted “two-hour” rule concerning substitution of jurors (CPL 270.35[2] ).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.