People v. Rowley
| Decision Date | 29 December 1995 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. George ROWLEY, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Bruce D. Townsend, Walden, for appellant.
Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen (Richard B. Schoenberg, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANGANO, P.J., and MILLER, COPERTINO, SANTUCCI and HART, JJ.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Byrne, J.), rendered February 10, 1995, convicting him of attempted murder in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
While it is true that the psychiatric and psychological evaluations which were performed on the defendant revealed a history of substance abuse and paranoid schizophrenia, 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. Hollis, 204 A.D.2d 569, 614 N.Y.S.2d 211). Moreover, two psychiatrists who examined the defendant found him fit to stand trial.
Furthermore, 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 County 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. Call
...People v. Keiser, 100 A.D.3d 927, 929, 954 N.Y.S.2d 184 ; People v. Ramirez, 29 A.D.3d 1022, 1022, 815 N.Y.S.2d 480 ; People v. Rowley, 222 A.D.2d 718, 718, 636 N.Y.S.2d 66 ).Review of the defendant's contention that the indictment contained duplicitous counts was forfeited by his plea of g......
-
People v. Rodney
...the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by determining that he was competent to stand trial (see, People v. Rowley, 222 A.D.2d 718, 636 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Picozzi, 106 A.D.2d 413, 482 N.Y.S.2d 335). Moreover, the court properly permitted the defendant to continue p......
-
People v. Gomez
...capacity to understand the proceedings against him or that he was unable to assist in his defense (see, CPL 730.30[1]; People v. Rowley, 222 A.D.2d 718, 636 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Hollis, 204 A.D.2d 569, 614 N.Y.S.2d 211). To the contrary, his responses to the court's inquiries were appropr......
-
People v. Phillips
...of the violation of probation proceedings indicates that the defendant was an incapacitated person (see, CPL 730.10; People v. Rowley, 222 A.D.2d 718, 636 N.Y.S.2d 66; People v. Hollis, 204 A.D.2d 569, 614 N.Y.S.2d 211; People v. Polimeda, 198 A.D.2d 242, 603 N.Y.S.2d 513; People v. Parker,......