People v. Farinaro
| Decision Date | 26 March 1975 |
| Citation | 326 N.E.2d 819,36 N.Y.2d 283,367 N.Y.S.2d 258 |
| Parties | , 326 N.E.2d 819 The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Joseph FARINARO, Appellant. The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Russell FRENCH, Appellant. The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. James MURPHY, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Matthew Muraskin and James J. McDonough, Mineola, N.Y., for appellants.
William Cahn, Dist. Atty. (Joseph A. DeMaro and Henry P. DeVince, Mineola, N.Y., of counsel), for respondent.
In each of these defendant was convicted in the trial court of a traffic infraction, in one by plea of guilty and in the other two after trial. In each instance trial counsel was assigned. In none of the cases does defendant show the ground for appeal, although represented by counsel at the trial level. All that is urged in each case is that the Appellate Term erred in not assigning counsel at public expense for an appeal stated in the abstract as a right, although no error below is assigned and defendant no longer faces the possibility of imprisonment.
Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, 92 S.Ct. 2006, 32 L.Ed.2d 530, a case holding, in effect, that there is a constitutional right to counsel at a criminal trial where conviction would lead to a sentence of imprisonment, is inapposite to an appeal of a conviction for a traffic infraction where defendant no longer faces the possibility of imprisonment.
There is no statutory right to the assignment of counsel in traffic infraction prosecutions (County Law, § 722--a; CPL 170.10, subd. 3, par. (c)). And this court has held that the State Constitution does not require assignment of counsel in such prosecutions (People v. Letterio, 16 N.Y.2d 307, 266 N.Y.S.2d 368, 213 N.E.2d 670). A fortiori, there would be no right to the assignment of counsel on appeal.
An uncounseled defendant in a criminal case may not be capable of assigning error; but surely a defendant convicted of a traffic infraction, who was represented by counsel at the trial level, is hardly in such a position. If perchance he is, that should be shown and addressed to the court's discretion. It is no general answer that he needs a transcript of the proceedings in traffic matters at public expense before he or his lawyer could suggest the error meriting appeal. The situation is even more ludicrous when the issue is urged, as it is in one of the cases, where defendant had pleaded guilty.
It is not persuasive to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
LTown Ltd. Partnership v. Sire Plan, Inc.
...frivolous appeals. Despite the occasional "fool in funds * * * able to pursue a useless or trivial appeal" (People v. Farinaro, 36 N.Y.2d 283, 286, 367 N.Y.S.2d 258, 326 N.E.2d 819), the cost of preparing the record caused counsel and clients to take a hard look and carefully assess their c......
-
People v. Russo
...(Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 25, 101 S.Ct. 2153, 2158, 68 L.Ed.2d 640). In People v. Farinaro, 36 N.Y.2d 283, 367 N.Y.S.2d 258, 326 N.E.2d 819, it was held that the defendants, who no longer faced the possibility of imprisonment following their convictions of var......
-
People v. White
...somewhat parallel course under its own Constitution, similarly has drawn the line at deprivation of liberty (People v. Farinaro, 36 N.Y.2d 283, 285, 367 N.Y.S.2d 258, 326 N.E.2d 819 And, as Chief Judge Desmond, in a dissent in which he was joined by then Judge Fuld, presciently put it more ......
-
People v. Schuster
...right to assignment of counsel, although a conviction could conceivably lead to imprisonment (People v. Farinaro, 36 N.Y.2d 283, 285, 367 N.Y.S.2d 258, 259, 326 N.E.2d 819, 820 (1975)). Section 120(a) of the Traffic Regulations, under which defendant was prosecuted, prohibits the use of our......