People v. Hoffmann

• Decision Date: 26 November 2014
• Docket Number: 2011-11899
• Citation: 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 08352,998 N.Y.S.2d 87,122 A.D.3d 945
• Parties: The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Richard HOFFMANN, appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

122 A.D.3d 945
998 N.Y.S.2d 87
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 08352

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent
v.
Richard HOFFMANN, appellant.

2011-11899

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Nov. 26, 2014.

998 N.Y.S.2d 88

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Patricia Pazner of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Nicoletta J. Caferri, and Laura T. Ross of counsel), for respondent.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, ROBERT J. MILLER, and COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.

Opinion

122 A.D.3d 945

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lewis, J.), rendered December 14, 2011, convicting him of driving while intoxicated in violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192(3), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court erred in denying defense counsel's challenge for cause to a prospective juror is only partially preserved for appellate review, as defense counsel failed to challenge the prospective juror on one of the specific grounds asserted on appeal (see CPL 470.05[2] ; People v. Campbell, 111 A.D.3d 760, 760, 974 N.Y.S.2d 555 ). In any event, the contention is without merit. A prospective juror may be challenged for cause on the ground that “[h]e [or she] has a state of mind that is likely to preclude him [or her] from rendering an impartial verdict based upon the evidence adduced at the trial” (CPL 270.20[1][b] ). “[A] prospective juror whose statements raise a serious doubt regarding the ability to be impartial must be excused unless the juror states unequivocally on the record that he or she can be fair and impartial” (People v. Chambers, 97 N.Y.2d 417, 419, 740 N.Y.S.2d 291, 766 N.E.2d 953 ; see People v. Arnold, 96 N.Y.2d 358, 362, 729 N.Y.S.2d 51, 753 N.E.2d 846 ). “Where a prospective juror offers such assurances, the...