The trial court properly determined that a sworn juror was grossly unqualified. Despite several inquiries by the court during voir dire, the juror withheld information about her criminal case that was pending in the same court building. After a thorough inquiry, the court reasonably concluded from the totality of the juror's conduct and responses that this juror possessed a state of mind that would have influenced her deliberations and prevented her from rendering an impartial verdict (see, CPL 270.35;People v. Buford, 69 N.Y.2d 290, 298; People v. Tamayo, 256 A.D.2d 98, lv denied N Y 2d [June 25, 1999], 1999 N Y LEXIS 2722; People v. Boston, 182 A.D.2d 494 lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 894).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.