People v. Hicks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hicks

56 A.D.2d 661, 392 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10801

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 56 A.D.2d 661 (People v. Hicks) 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. Hicks, 56 A.D.2d 661, 392 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10801 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered March 19, 1976, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, on his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review a determination made after a hearing that the defendant was able to understand the proceedings against him and was in a position to assist in his defense. Case remanded to the County Court for a further hearing as to defendant’s competency and appeal held in abeyance in the interim. On this record, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny defendant’s request for an adjournment of the hearing as to his competency to stand trial at a time when his attorney was actually engaged in a trial. The attorney who requested the adjournment, and who was unfamiliar with defendant’s long prior mental history, should not have been forced to proceed with the hearing. The issue here involved, of course, survived defendant’s plea of guilty (see People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167). Shapiro, Acting P. J., Titone, Hawkins and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County, rendered March 19, 1976, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, on his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. The appeal brings up for review a determination made after a hearing that the defendant was able to understand the proceedings against him and was in a position to assist in his defense. Case remanded to the County Court for a further hearing as to defendant’s competency and appeal held in abeyance in the interim. On this record, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny defendant’s request for an adjournment of the hearing as to his competency to stand trial at a time when his attorney was actually engaged in a trial. The attorney who requested the adjournment, and who was unfamiliar with defendant’s long prior mental history, should not have been forced to proceed with the hearing. The issue here involved, of course, survived defendant’s plea of guilty (see People v Armlin, 37 NY2d 167). Shapiro, Acting P. J., Titone, Hawkins and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 661, 392 N.Y.S.2d 51, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hicks-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack