PEOPLE v. FERNANDEZ (2022)

Judgment of conviction (Heidi C. Cesare, J.), rendered April 26, 2018, affirmed.

Giving deference to the trial court's ability to observe demeanor, we conclude that it properly granted the prosecutor's challenge for cause to a prospective juror, since the panelist lacked the ability to evaluate police testimony fairly and impartially. Although the prospective juror stated that she could be fair, her assurances were invariably qualified by references to her predispositions; under the circumstances, it was best to disqualify her (see People v De La Cruz, 44 AD3d 346, 347 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 1005 [2007]; People v Oliveri, 29 AD3d 330, 331 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 792 [2006]). “It is almost always wise ․ to err on the side of disqualification because ‘the worst the court will have done in most cases is to have replaced one impartial juror with another impartial juror’ ” (People v Culhane, 33 NY2d 90, 108 n 3 [1973]; see People v Arnold, 96 NY2d 358, 362 [2001]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.

All concur.