People v. Rodriguez
This text of 434 N.E.2d 1340 (People v. Rodriguez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
We cannot say on the facts of this case that the Trial Judge’s denial of defendant’s application for a second competency hearing was an abuse of discretion as a matter of law, either under CPL 730.30 or 730.60 (subd 2) as it read at the time of defendant’s trial.
The other error alleged, not having been preserved for review by appropriate objection or request for curative instruction, is beyond our power of review.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
434 N.E.2d 1340, 56 N.Y.2d 557, 449 N.Y.S.2d 962, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3231, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rodriguez-ny-1982.