Opinion
June 25, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edwin Torres, J.).
The court's unsolicited remark during jury selection did not convey to the jury the court's opinion on the merits of the case, and the court's curative instruction cured any possible prejudice.
The court properly exercised its discretion by denying defendant's application to present alleged expert testimony concerning the practices of drug dealers. The purported expert's proposed testimony was speculative, irrelevant to the facts of the case, and likely to confuse and distract the jury (see, People v. Oquendo, 250 A.D.2d 420).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Williams, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.