People v. Sutton
| Decision Date | 02 May 2018 |
| Docket Number | 2014–07998,Ind. No. 13–00870 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Justin SUTTON, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
161 A.D.3d 783
76 N.Y.S.3d 570
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Justin SUTTON, appellant.
2014–07998
Ind. No. 13–00870
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Submitted—January 8, 2018
May 2, 2018
Del Atwell, East Hampton, NY, for appellant.
Anthony A. Scarpino, Jr., District Attorney, White Plains, N.Y. (Christine DiSalvo and William C. Milaccio of counsel), for respondent.
CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Robert A. Neary, J.), rendered June 25, 2014, convicting him of identity theft in the first degree (two counts), grand larceny in the third degree, and scheme to defraud in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court did not err in granting his request to represent himself at trial. " ‘Before allowing a defendant to proceed pro se, the court must determine that the defendant's waiver of the right to counsel is made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently’ " ( People v. Bristol , 102 A.D.3d 881, 882, 958 N.Y.S.2d 215, quoting People v. Rafikian , 98 A.D.3d 1139, 1139, 951 N.Y.S.2d 226 ). " ‘To ascertain whether a waiver is knowing, voluntary and intelligent, a court must undertake a searching inquiry designed to insur[e] that the defendant [is] aware of the dangers and disadvantages of proceeding without counsel’ " ( People v. Stroud , 144 A.D.3d 1056, 1057, 40 N.Y.S.3d 910, quoting People v. Crampe , 17 N.Y.3d 469, 481, 932 N.Y.S.2d 765, 957 N.E.2d 255 [internal quotation marks omitted] ). "In particular, the record should show that the trial court ‘adequately warn[ed][the] defendant of the risks inherent in proceeding pro se, and appris[ed][the] defendant of the singular importance of the lawyer in the adversarial system of adjudication’ " ( People v. Rafikian , 98 A.D.3d at 1140, 951 N.Y.S.2d 226 [emphasis omitted], quoting People v. Arroyo...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Baez
... ... Crampe , 17 N.Y.3d 469 481482, 932 N.Y.S.2d 765, 957 N.E.2d 255 ; People v. Ball , 162 A.D.3d 680, 681, 78 N.Y.S.3d 225 ; People v. Sutton , 161 A.D.3d 783, 783784, 76 N.Y.S.3d 570 ). The Supreme Court adequately warned the defendant of the risk inherent in proceeding pro se, and apprised him of the singular importance of the lawyer in the adversarial system of adjudication (see People v. Crampe , 17 N.Y.3d at 483, 932 N.Y.S.2d 765, ... ...
-
People v. Smith
... ... Morrow , 143 A.D.3d 919, 39 N.Y.S.3d 232 ). The court questioned the defendant as to his education, occupation, legal knowledge and experience, and prior exposure to the criminal justice system (see People v. Sutton , 161 A.D.3d 783, 76 N.Y.S.3d 570 ). The court adequately informed the defendant of the risks inherent in proceeding pro se, drew the defendant's attention to the many challenges that he would face if he proceeded pro se, and apprised him of the benefits and the singular importance of ... ...
-
People v. Johnson
... ... Wright, 95 A.D.3d 1046, 1047, 943 N.Y.S.2d 766 ).The defendant's contention that the County Court failed to fully comply with CPL 400.21 before sentencing him as a second felony offender is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v. Sutton, 161 A.D.3d 783, 784, 76 N.Y.S.3d 570 ; People v. Csoke, 11 A.D.3d 631, 782 N.Y.S.2d 657 ). In any event, the court substantially complied with the statute, and there is no indication that the defendant intended to challenge the constitutionality of his prior conviction (see People v. Smothers, 175 ... ...
-
People v. Cucchiara
... ... pro se. Accordingly, the record demonstrated that the defendant made a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent decision 105 N.Y.S.3d 533 to waive his right to counsel and to proceed pro se (see People v. Crampe , 17 N.Y.3d at 483, 932 N.Y.S.2d 765, 957 N.E.2d 255 ; People v. Sutton , 161 A.D.3d 783, 76 N.Y.S.3d 570 ; People v. Wright, 152 A.D.3d 801, 802, 56 N.Y.S.3d 465 ; People v. Franklin , 146 A.D.3d 1082, 1085, 45 N.Y.S.3d 635 ; People v. Morrow , 143 A.D.3d 919, 919, 39 N.Y.S.3d 232 ). Insofar as the defendant argues that his waiver of the right to counsel resulted in ... ...