People v. Latimer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Latimer

220 A.D.2d 223, 632 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9686

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

DecidedOctober 3, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 220 A.D.2d 223 (People v. Latimer) 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. Latimer, 220 A.D.2d 223, 632 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9686 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Herbert Adlerberg, J.), rendered July 31, 1991, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree, and, after a probation revocation hearing, resentencing him to a term of 1 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

There is no merit to defendant’s claim that the trial court effectively denied his right to proceed pro se at his probation revocation hearing by coercing him into accepting counsel he did not want. The court’s warnings to defendant that he who proceeded as his own counsel had a fool for a client, and that defendant would be strictly held to the rules of evidence, were proper attempts to make defendant aware of the dangers of representing himself, as were the other efforts by the court to insure that the waiver of counsel was knowing, voluntary and unequivocal (see, People v Vivenzio, 62 NY2d 775, 776; People v McIntyre, 36 NY2d 10, 17). Defendant’s ultimate decision not to represent himself was made after the court had granted him permission to do so, and thus could only have been the result of the consultation defendant had with his legal advisor during a recess, rather than any coercion by the court. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Herbert Adlerberg, J.), rendered July 31, 1991, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of assault in the second degree, and, after a probation revocation hearing, resentencing him to a term of 1 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

There is no merit to defendant’s claim that the trial court effectively denied his right to proceed pro se at his probation revocation hearing by coercing him into accepting counsel he did not want. The court’s warnings to defendant that he who proceeded as his own counsel had a fool for a client, and that defendant would be strictly held to the rules of evidence, were proper attempts to make defendant aware of the dangers of representing himself, as were the other efforts by the court to insure that the waiver of counsel was knowing, voluntary and unequivocal (see, People v Vivenzio, 62 NY2d 775, 776; People v McIntyre, 36 NY2d 10, 17). Defendant’s ultimate decision not to represent himself was made after the court had granted him permission to do so, and thus could only have been the result of the consultation defendant had with his legal advisor during a recess, rather than any coercion by the court. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

220 A.D.2d 223, 632 N.Y.S.2d 12, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9686, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-latimer-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack