People v. Anderson

2 Citing cases

  1. People v. Square

    262 A.D.2d 154 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)   Cited 6 times

    After sufficient inquiry and ample opportunity for defendant to be heard, the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's request for substitution of assigned counsel. Other than defendant's disagreement with his counsel's sound advice to plead guilty, defendant's complaints about his counsel consisted of conclusory allegations of inadequate preparation and communication. Based on the entirety of the record and the court's familiarity with the proceedings, the court properly found that defendant failed to demonstrate good cause warranting substitution ( see, People v. Sides, 75 N.Y.2d 822; People v. Anderson, 207 A.D.2d 746, 747). Defendant has failed to preserve for appellate, review his contention that he was deprived of a fair trial by the admission of background testimony concerning the prevalence of drugs in the neighborhood in which he was arrested and that certain observation posts were selected by the police based on community complaints and personal observations ( People v. Tevaha, 84 N.Y.2d 879), and we decline to review in the interest of justice.

  2. People v. Davis

    233 A.D.2d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)   Cited 3 times

    Were we to review it, we would find that defendant's erratic driving provided a reasonable basis for stopping him to determine whether he had a driver's license ( People v Alston, 195 AD2d 396, 397). Also unpreserved is defendant's pro se claim that the court should have granted his mid-trial motion for either the assignment of new counsel or the substitution of retained counsel, who was then out of the country ( People v Anderson, 207 AD2d 746), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. In any event, defendant failed to demonstrate any good cause for the substitution ( People v Sides, 75 NY2d 822, 824).