People v. Williams
| Decision Date | 20 May 1971 |
| Citation | 36 A.D.2d 1018,321 N.Y.S.2d 463 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert J. WILLIAMS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Nicholas P. Verlan, David D. Egan, Rochester, for appellant.
Jack B. Lazarus, Edward J. Spires, Rochester, for respondent.
Before DEL VECCHIO, J.P., and WITMER, GABRIELLI, MOULE and HENRY, JJ.
Appellant claims that he did not have a fair trial because the Trial Court denied his motion for removal of leg cuffs during the trial. In considering the motion the Court questioned the Sheriff's officer who had custody of defendant and the officer said that such restraint was necessary for the purpose of securing the defendant and the preservation of order in the courtroom. While the Sheriff's officer in the discharge of his duties has the initial responsibility of determining whether an accused should be restrained by leg cuffs during the trial, the trial judge must, in presiding over the trial, decide the question for himself. (People v. Mendola, 2 N.Y.2d 270, 277, 159 N.Y.S.2d 473, 478, 140 N.E.2d 353, 356--357.) Where the facts relevant to the needs of restraint of a defendant are not sufficiently developed upon the trial a post trial hearing should be had on that issue. (townsend v. sain, 372 U.S. 293, 83 S.ct. 745, 9 L.ed.2d 770; woodards v. Cardwell, 6 Cir., 430 F.2d 978, 981.) A hearing should therefore be had at which the Trial Court should take testimony as to the necessity for the leg cuffs and state for the record his reasons for confirming or rejecting the decision of the Sheriff in that respect. (People v. Bryant, 5 Misc.2d 446, 448, 166 N.Y.S.2d 59, 61.)
Appeal held, decision reserved and case remitted to Monroe County Court for further proceedings.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Johnson
...but where there is a total lack of a record, the decision should be remanded for a hearing); See also, People v. Williams, 36 App.Div.2d 1018, 321 N.Y.S.2d 463 (1971)(where the facts relevant to the needs of restraint of defendant are not sufficiently developed at trial, a post-trial hearin......
-
People v. Reingold
...must be had whereon testimony should be taken for the record regarding the reasons for restraining the defendant (People v. Williams, 36 A.D.2d 1018, 321 N.Y.S.2d 463). The Court, therefore, erred in denying this motion without taking evidence to support the exercise of its Defendant conten......
-
People v. Allen
...necessary, but where there is a total lack of a record, the decision may be remanded for a hearing); See also, People v. Williams, 36 App.Div.2d 1018, 321 N.Y.S.2d 463 (1971) (where the facts relevant to the needs of restraint of defendant are not sufficiently developed at trial, a post-tri......
-
People v. Neu
...106 S.Ct. 1340, 1346-1347, 89 L.Ed.2d 525; People v. Mendola, 2 N.Y.2d 270, 275, 159 N.Y.S.2d 473, 140 N.E.2d 353; People v. Williams, 36 A.D.2d 1018, 321 N.Y.S.2d 463; Propriety and Prejudicial Effect of Gagging, Shackling, or Otherwise Physically Restraining Accused During Course of State......