People v. Gasper

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gasper

186 A.D.2d 390, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11220

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 8, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.D.2d 390 (People v. Gasper) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Gasper, 186 A.D.2d 390, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11220 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (William T. Martin, J.), rendered May 9, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of arson in the second degree and burglary in the second degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 10 to 20 years and 4 to 8 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion for a mistrial. The court made a reasonable inquiry of defendant as to why he wanted to absent himself from the trial, ascertained that his decision was knowing and voluntary (see, People v Aiken, 45 NY2d 394, 397), and then properly required his presence only for the purpose of in-court identification by the People’s witnesses (People v Winship, 309 NY 311, 313-314). The record also demonstrates that the court did not encourage defendant to act as co-counsel, but rather sought to explain to him the difficulties and pitfalls of self-representation. We have considered defendant’s other points and find them to be without merit. Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Ross and Asch, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (William T. Martin, J.), rendered May 9, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of arson in the second degree and burglary in the second degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 10 to 20 years and 4 to 8 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion for a mistrial. The court made a reasonable inquiry of defendant as to why he wanted to absent himself from the trial, ascertained that his decision was knowing and voluntary (see, People v Aiken, 45 NY2d 394, 397), and then properly required his presence only for the purpose of in-court identification by the People’s witnesses (People v Winship, 309 NY 311, 313-314). The record also demonstrates that the court did not encourage defendant to act as co-counsel, but rather sought to explain to him the difficulties and pitfalls of self-representation. We have considered defendant’s other points and find them to be without merit. Concur — Carro, J. P., Wallach, Ross and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.D.2d 390, 588 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gasper-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack