Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's sole contention is that the trial court erred in denying the defense counsel's challenge for cause of a juror whose brother was a police officer. A challenge to a prospective juror on the ground that the juror has a state of mind that is likely to preclude him or her from rendering an impartial verdict should only be granted if there is a substantial risk that the juror's state of mind will affect his or her ability to discharge his responsibilities, a determination committed to the discretion of the trial court, with its unique opportunities to evaluate the prospective jurors during voir dire ( see, People v. Williams, 63 N.Y.2d 882; People v. Davis, 221 A.D.2d 653; People v. Campbell, 216 A.D.2d 482). The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defense counsel's challenge.
Sullivan, J. P., Joy, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.