People v. Leao

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Leao

295 A.D.2d 132, 742 N.Y.S.2d 827, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5853

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

DecidedJune 6, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 295 A.D.2d 132 (People v. Leao) 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. Leao, 295 A.D.2d 132, 742 N.Y.S.2d 827, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5853 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Martin Marcus, J.), rendered May 11, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly permitted defendant to represent himself. In response to defendant’s unequivocal expression of his desire to proceed pro se, the court thoroughly warned him of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, thereby ensuring that defendant made a voluntary and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel (see, People v Smith, 92 NY2d 516). Défendant’s lack of legal knowledge would not have been a proper basis upon which to deny him the right of self-representation (People v Davis, 49 NY2d 114, 120). We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Lerner, Rubin, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Martin Marcus, J.), rendered May 11, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 25 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly permitted defendant to represent himself. In response to defendant’s unequivocal expression of his desire to proceed pro se, the court thoroughly warned him of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, thereby ensuring that defendant made a voluntary and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel (see, People v Smith, 92 NY2d 516). Défendant’s lack of legal knowledge would not have been a proper basis upon which to deny him the right of self-representation (People v Davis, 49 NY2d 114, 120). We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Lerner, Rubin, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 A.D.2d 132, 742 N.Y.S.2d 827, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5853, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-leao-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack