Opinion
No. 4564.
March 22, 2011.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy L. Kahn, J.), rendered February 20, 2008, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of forgery in the second and third degrees, offering a false instrument for filing in the first degree, identity theft in the first and third degrees, and falsely reporting an incident in the third degree, and sentencing her to an aggregate term of 2 to 6 years, unanimously affirmed.
Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Paul Wiener of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Matthew C. Williams of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Tom, J.P., Andrias, Sweeny, Moskowitz and Renwick, JJ.
The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's challenge for cause to a prospective juror with expertise in computer forensics, a field that was the subject of conflicting expert testimony at trial. The panelist unequivocally assured the court that, in reaching a verdict, he would "absolutely" not be influenced in any way by his own knowledge, and would not convey that knowledge during deliberations. Accordingly, his responses did not call into question his ability to follow the court's instructions ( see People v Arnold, 96 NY2d 358, 362). Defendant argues that the panelist was an inherently unsuitable juror for a case involving his own particular area of expertise. However, the panelist expressed no difficulty in excluding that expertise from his own determination of the facts and from his discussions with other jurors. The court, which had the opportunity to see and hear the panelist, credited those assurances.
The court properly modified its pretrial ruling to permit introduction of an uncharged crime or bad act. A flyer posted in the victim's apartment building was probative of defendant's continued scheme to harass her ex-boyfriend's family members. The relevance and probative value of the flyer became apparent during the trial after defense counsel opened the door during cross-examination ( see People v Massie, 2 NY3d 179). In any event, any error in receipt of this evidence was harmless ( see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230).