People v. Lane

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him of burglary in the third degree (Penal Law § 140.20) and other crimes, defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in denying his challenge for cause to a prospective juror. We disagree. Nothing in the transcript of voir dire *848indicates that the prospective juror had a “state of mind that [was] likely to preclude him from rendering an impartial verdict based upon the evidence adduced at the trial” (CPL 270.20 [1] [b]). The prospective juror expressed no misgivings about his ability to decide the case…