People v. Gundy

Decision Date16 December 1996
PartiesThe PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Wayne GUNDY, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Alan Polsky, Bohemia, for appellant.

James M. Catterson, Jr., District Attorney, Riverhead, (Glenn Green, of counsel), for respondent.

Before BRACKEN, J.P., and COPERTINO, JOY and ALTMAN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered January 30, 1995, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant's motion, made on the eve of trial, for an adjournment to retain new counsel (see, People v. Winslow, 222 A.D.2d 722, 636 N.Y.S.2d 68; People v. Erber, 210 A.D.2d 250, 619 N.Y.S.2d 344; People v. Gloster, 175 A.D.2d 258, 260, 572 N.Y.S.2d 370).

In addition, the court did not err by relieving counsel in the middle of the trial and allowing the defendant to represent himself (see, People v. Hambric, 225 A.D.2d 633, 639 N.Y.S.2d 440; People v. Howell, 207 A.D.2d 412, 413, 615 N.Y.S.2d 728; People v. Gloster, 175 A.D.2d 258, 260, 572 N.Y.S.2d 370). An effective waiver of the right to counsel must be the product of free and meaningful choice, and a criminal defendant may be asked to choose between waiver of his right to counsel and another course of action as long as the choice is not constitutionally offensive (see, Maynard v. Meachum, 545 F.2d 273, 278; People v. Sawyer, 57 N.Y.2d 12, 453 N.Y.S.2d 418, 438 N.E.2d 1133, cert. denied 459 U.S. 1178, 103 S.Ct. 830, 74 L.Ed.2d 1024). Here, the defendant's refusal, without good cause, to proceed with able appointed counsel was a voluntary waiver of his right to counsel (see, People v. Hambric, supra; Maynard v. Meachum, supra; Pizarro v. Harris, 507 F.Supp. 642, 646).

The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675).

The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • People v. Fisher
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 20 Marzo 2013
  • People v. Robinson
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 3 Noviembre 1997
    ... ...         ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed ...         The Supreme Court did not err in relieving counsel and allowing the defendant to represent himself at trial (see, People v. Gundy, 234 A.D.2d 476, 651 N.Y.S.2d 576; People v. Hambric, 225 A.D.2d 633, 639 N.Y.S.2d 440; People v. Howell, 207 A.D.2d 412, 413, 615 N.Y.S.2d 728; People v. Gloster, 175 A.D.2d 258, 260, 572 N.Y.S.2d 370). Although effective waiver of the right to counsel must be the product of free, meaningful ... ...
  • People v. Gundy
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 14 Febrero 1997

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT