People v. Rizzuto, 7965
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
| Citation | 167 A.D.3d 531,90 N.Y.S.3d 166 |
| Docket Number | 7965,Ind. 4339/16 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Alfonso RIZZUTO, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 27 December 2018 |
167 A.D.3d 531
90 N.Y.S.3d 166
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Alfonso RIZZUTO, Defendant–Appellant.
7965
Ind. 4339/16
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
ENTERED: DECEMBER 27, 2018
Marianne Karas, Thornwood, for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Oliver McDonald of counsel), for respondent.
Acosta, P.J., Gische, Mazzarelli, Webber, Oing, JJ.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (James M. Burke, J. at pretrial proceedings; Juan M. Merchan, J. at plea and sentencing), rendered April 19, 2017, convicting defendant of burglary in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of seven years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's absence from a brief colloquy does not warrant reversal. While awaiting the arrival of defendant, who was appearing pro se, the plea court had a conversation with the prosecutor and standby counsel concerning essentially administrative matters. There were no applications by either side, or determinations of any legal or factual issues. Accordingly, nothing occurred that required defendant's presence, including in his capacity as his own attorney (see People v. Hameed, 88 N.Y.2d 232, 240–241, 644 N.Y.S.2d 466, 666 N.E.2d 1339 [1996], cert denied 519 U.S. 1065, 117 S.Ct. 704, 136 L.Ed.2d 625 [1997] ).
Defendant's attorney, who became standby counsel after defendant knowingly and voluntary waived his right to counsel, was neither conflicted nor otherwise ineffective at any stage of the proceeding. No conflict was created when the attorney exercised his professional judgment in declining to adopt his client's pro se motions (see e.g. People v. Mangum, 12 A.D.3d 207, 208, 783 N.Y.S.2d 808 [1st Dept. 2004], lv denied 4 N.Y.3d 765, 792 N.Y.S.2d 9, 825 N.E.2d 141 [2005] ), or when he candidly acknowledged that defendant was in danger of being sentenced as a discretionary persistent felon. Accordingly, there was no reason for the courts presiding at either the pretrial or plea proceedings to appoint a new attorney for any purpose.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ital Assocs. v. Axon, 7974N
...246 A.D.2d 291, 294, 676 N.Y.S.2d 579 [1st Dept. 1998] ). The fact that SGA has already been partially compensated by plaintiffs 90 N.Y.S.3d 166does not preclude a fee award, as that would be inconsistent with the purpose of the common fund doctrine to prevent unjust enrichment by "allow[in......
-
Rizzuto v. Annucci, 533003
...incarcerated person who began serving a prison term in May 2017 upon his conviction of burglary in the second degree ( People v. Rizzuto, 167 A.D.3d 531, 90 N.Y.S.3d 166 [2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 980, 101 N.Y.S.3d 249, 124 N.E.3d 738 [2019] ). He thereafter filed 66 inmate grievances over......
-
Rizzuto v. Annucci, 2022-02597
...incarcerated person who began serving a prison term in May 2017 upon his conviction of burglary in the second degree (People v Rizzuto, 167 A.D.3d 531 [2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 980 [2019]). He thereafter filed 66 inmate grievances over the ensuing 13 months, many voluminous and duplicativ......
-
Rizzuto v. Annucci, 533003
...incarcerated person who began serving a prison term in May 2017 upon his conviction of burglary in the second degree (People v Rizzuto, 167 A.D.3d 531 [2018], lv denied 33 N.Y.3d 980 [2019]). He thereafter filed 66 inmate grievances over the ensuing 13 months, many voluminous and duplicativ......