People v. Lantigua

*430The court’s rulings relating to expert testimony were proper exercises of discretion. The People’s translator was fully qualified to translate the Spanish conversations intercepted on wiretaps. The court properly permitted an expert to give background testimony on large-scale narcotics operations and to explain coded language. This information is beyond the knowledge of the average juror and would assist the jurors in understanding the evidence in a case involving complex, international drug activity (see People v Brown, 97 NY2d 500, 505-506 [2002]; People v Ramirez, 33 AD3d 460 [2006], lv…