Opinion
October 17, 1988
Appeal from the County Court, Orange County (Cowhey, J.).
Ordered that the judgment as amended is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was denied his constitutional right to represent himself. The exercise of this right requires an unequivocal request to proceed pro se (People v Sawyer, 57 N.Y.2d 12, 21, cert denied 459 U.S. 1178; People v McIntyre, 36 N.Y.2d 10, 17) which was lacking in this case. The record indicates that the defendant wanted an attorney to represent him but also wanted to make additional motions which his assigned counsel apparently thought were inappropriate. Under these circumstances the trial court acted properly in denying his requests to proceed pro se. Although a trial court may appoint counsel to assist a pro se defendant, a defendant has no constitutional right to a hybrid form of representation (People v Garcia, 69 N.Y.2d 903, rearg denied 70 N.Y.2d 694; People v Mirenda, 57 N.Y.2d 261). Since the defendant at bar made no request for standby counsel at the trial, no error was committed.
Finally, the defendant's possible affliction with acquired immune deficiency syndrome, in and of itself, does not warrant reducing the otherwise appropriate sentence (see, People v Napolitano, 138 A.D.2d 414; People v Parker, 132 A.D.2d 629, appeal dismissed 71 N.Y.2d 887; People v Brandow, 139 A.D.2d 819). Mangano, J.P., Weinstein, Kooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.