The court properly denied defendant's challenge for cause to a prospective juror who brought up the fact that he had served on a committee seeking to keep drug dealers out of his building. The panelist never expressed any bias, and, in any event, gave unequivocal assurances of his impartiality during the court's careful inquiry ( see People v. Arnold, 96 N.Y.2d 358, 362-363; People v. Johnson, 94 N.Y.2d 600, 614). In context, the panelist's use of expressions such as "I believe" did not render his declarations equivocal ( see People v. Chambers, 97 N.Y.2d 417, 419). In any event, defendant acquiesced to the court's ruling, thereby failing to preserve his objection ( People v. Laverpool, 267 A.D.2d 93, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 904).
The court properly denied defendant's speedy trial motion. The People were entitled to a reasonable period in which to provide grand jury minutes to the court following defendant's motion to inspect the minutes and dismiss the indictment ( People v. Harris, 82 N.Y.2d 409, 414 [36 days held reasonable]; People v. Foy, 249 A.D.2d 217, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 897 [35 days]). Furthermore, the record establishes that defense counsel requested the November 29, 2000 and January 22, 2001 adjournments by submitting notices of actual engagement ( see CPL 30.30[b],[f]; People v. Lassiter, 240 A.D.2d 293; People v. Cambridge, 230 A.D.2d 649, 650; People v. Brown, 195 A.D.2d 310, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 891). We find it unnecessary to reach any other issues relating to the speedy trial motion.
We decline to invoke our interest of justice jurisdiction to dismiss the non-inclusory concurrent count ( see People v. Spence, 290 A.D.2d 223, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 641; People v. Kulakov, 278 A.D.2d 519, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 785).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.