People v. Thrower

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Thrower

210 A.D.2d 169, 620 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13080

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 210 A.D.2d 169 (People v. Thrower) 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. Thrower, 210 A.D.2d 169, 620 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13080 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Mary McGowan Davis, J.), rendered April 14, 1993, which convicted defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentenced him, as a predicate felony offender, to a term of 1 Vi to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

"The right of an indigent criminal defendant to the services of a court-appointed lawyer does not encompass a right to appointment of successive lawyers at defendant’s option.” (People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824.) In this case, the court carefully examined defendant’s reasons for wanting to substitute counsel, and found that defendant was primarily motivated by the desire to delay the proceedings, and that the tensions between defendant and his attorney were precipitated by counsel’s conveyance of the People’s offer of a plea bargain. Thus, there were acceptable grounds for denying the request to substitute counsel (see, People v Medina, 44 NY2d 199). Moreover, assuming arguendo, the court erred initially in denying substitution, new counsel was subsequently assigned. Defendant, by new counsel, then moved to withdraw his guilty plea, but withdrew that motion prior to the conduct of a hearing scheduled by the court with respect to the plea. The court’s corrective action was fully protective of defendant’s rights. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Asch and Tom, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Mary McGowan Davis, J.), rendered April 14, 1993, which convicted defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of grand larceny in the fourth degree, and sentenced him, as a predicate felony offender, to a term of 1 Vi to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

"The right of an indigent criminal defendant to the services of a court-appointed lawyer does not encompass a right to appointment of successive lawyers at defendant’s option.” (People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824.) In this case, the court carefully examined defendant’s reasons for wanting to substitute counsel, and found that defendant was primarily motivated by the desire to delay the proceedings, and that the tensions between defendant and his attorney were precipitated by counsel’s conveyance of the People’s offer of a plea bargain. Thus, there were acceptable grounds for denying the request to substitute counsel (see, People v Medina, 44 NY2d 199). Moreover, assuming arguendo, the court erred initially in denying substitution, new counsel was subsequently assigned. Defendant, by new counsel, then moved to withdraw his guilty plea, but withdrew that motion prior to the conduct of a hearing scheduled by the court with respect to the plea. The court’s corrective action was fully protective of defendant’s rights. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Asch and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 A.D.2d 169, 620 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-thrower-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack