Defendant's suppression motion was properly denied. Initially, we find the testimony of police witnesses to have been credible. Surveillance and wiretap evidence placed defendant at the center of a sizeable drug operation, some of whose members were arrested and charged with possessory drug and weapon offenses. Subsequent intercepted conversations in which defendant participated indicated that a major drug transaction was imminent, providing police with probable cause to stop defendant as he exited his car, apparently to transfer drugs, and to search the knapsack (People v. Vasquez, 195 A.D.2d 297; People v. Brown, 151 A.D.2d 199, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 768). The fact that a prospective juror was a police officer once assigned to the area of the arrest did not support defendant's challenge for cause where the juror had no knowledge of any trial witnesses (People v. Ware, 173 A.D.2d 903) and asserted his ability to be fair (People v. Ruiz, 162 A.D.2d 637, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 990). By contrast, a sworn juror who consistently demonstrated scorn for the criminal justice system was properly discharged as being grossly unqualified (People v. Burwell, 159 A.D.2d 407, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 785), especially insofar as the juror declined to assure the court of his impartiality (People v. Galvin, 112 A.D.2d 1090).
We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them to be meritless.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.