People v. Singletary

63 A.D.3d 1654, 880 N.Y.S.2d 829
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 5, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by27 cases

This text of 63 A.D.3d 1654 (People v. Singletary) 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. Singletary, 63 A.D.3d 1654, 880 N.Y.S.2d 829 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John R. Schwartz, A.J.), rendered June 23, 2005. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of attempted burglary in the third degree, attempted assault in the third degree and criminal mischief in the fourth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of, inter alia, attempted burglary in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.20), defendant contends that reversal is warranted based on County Court’s mishandling of his complaints concerning his second attorney. We reject that contention. The record belies the contention of defendant that he requested new assigned counsel, and thus it cannot be said that the court erred in failing to conduct an inquiry to determine whether good cause was shown to substitute counsel (see People v La Bar, 16 AD3d 1084 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 764 [2005]; cf. People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824-825 [1990]). Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant’s complaints “ ‘suggest[ed] a serious possibility of good cause for substitution’ requiring a need for further inquiry” (People v Reese, 23 AD3d 1034, 1035 [2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 779 [2006]), we conclude that the court afforded defendant the opportunity to express his objections concerning his second attorney, and the court thereafter “ ‘reasonably concluded that defendant’s . . . objections had no merit or substance’ ” (id. at 1035; see People v Linares, 2 NY3d 507, 511 [2004]). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Present—Martoche, J.P, Smith, Fahey, Garni and Green, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Michel
2025 NY Slip Op 05601 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
People v. Kirkey
2024 NY Slip Op 06478 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
People v. Brown
2021 NY Slip Op 07447 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Darwish
2021 NY Slip Op 03936 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
People v. Shorter
2020 NY Slip Op 692 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Martinez
2018 NY Slip Op 7856 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
BETHANY, RAYSHAWN, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
People v. Bethany
144 A.D.3d 1666 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
CLARK, SYROYA N., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
People v. Clark
136 A.D.3d 1367 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
JOHNSON, ERIC W., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016
People v. Johnson
136 A.D.3d 1338 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
SMITH, TIMOTHY, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015
People v. Smith
134 A.D.3d 1568 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
JACKSON, AARON, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
People v. Jackson
120 A.D.3d 1601 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
GOOSSENS, CARL, PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012
People v. Goossens
96 A.D.3d 1687 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
ADGER, LAMAR O., PEOPLE v
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011
People v. Adger
83 A.D.3d 1590 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
63 A.D.3d 1654, 880 N.Y.S.2d 829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-singletary-nyappdiv-2009.