People v. Hollis
| Decision Date | 16 May 1994 |
| Citation | 204 A.D.2d 569,614 N.Y.S.2d 211 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Thomas HOLLIS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Susan B. Marhoffer, White Plains, for appellant.
Jeanine Pirro, Dist. Atty., White Plains (Christopher Michael Shaw and Bruce Edward Kelly, of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J.), rendered July 29, 1992, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
While the pre-sentence report indicates that the defendant "has a history of substance abuse and psychiatric problems" and that he has been diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic, there is no basis in the record to support the conclusion that at the time of the plea proceeding, the defendant lacked the capacity to understand the proceedings against him or that he was unable to assist in his defense (see, CPL 730.30[1]; People v. Johnston, 186 A.D.2d 680, 588 N.Y.S.2d 633; People v. Rogers, 163 A.D.2d 337, 557 N.Y.S.2d 168). Moreover, the responses made by the defendant at the plea and sentencing proceedings were appropriate and did not indicate that he was incapacitated. Accordingly, the failure of the Supreme Court to sua sponte order a competency hearing pursuant to CPL 730.30(1) did not constitute error.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Leach
...350;People v. Gallo, 73 A.D.3d 804, 805, 899 N.Y.S.2d 655;People v. Pryor, 11 A.D.3d 565, 566, 782 N.Y.S.2d 803;People v. Hollis, 204 A.D.2d 569, 614 N.Y.S.2d 211). The original charge under count one of the indictment had been reduced by a prior order of the County Court from grand larceny......
-
People v. Washington
...370 ; People v. Godfrey, 33 A.D.3d at 624, 822 N.Y.S.2d 135 ; People v. Phillips, 243 A.D.2d at 515, 663 N.Y.S.2d 90 ; People v. Hollis, 204 A.D.2d 569, 614 N.Y.S.2d 211 ).Contrary to the defendant's further contention, after his comments at the sentencing proceeding raised the possibility ......
- People v. Johnson
-
People v. Batista
...( see People v. Kessler, 5 A.D.3d 504, 505, 772 N.Y.S.2d 582;People v. Hansen, 269 A.D.2d 467, 468, 704 N.Y.S.2d 269;People v. Hollis, 204 A.D.2d 569, 614 N.Y.S.2d 211). Furthermore, the responses made by the defendant at the plea and sentencing proceedings were appropriate and did not indi......