Summary
In Bracy, supra, the Court held that it was proper for the trial court to relieve Defendant's counsel when, after adjournments due to engagements by counsel for more than a year, the Court denied a further adjournment of "many months" duration in order to allow counsel to complete a federal trial of "extraordinary length".
Summary of this case from People v. JonesOpinion
May 11, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J., at calendar calls and disqualification of counsel; Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J., at jury trial and sentence).
The calendar court properly exercised its discretion when, after the case had been pending for over a year including numerous adjournments due to defendant's retained counsel's other engagements, the court denied defendant's request for a further delay of many months' duration to permit counsel to complete a Federal trial of extraordinary length, and, instead, directed defendant to proceed with substitute retained counsel ( see, People v. Childs, 247 A.D.2d 319, 324-326, lv denied 92 N.Y.2d 849; People v. Nevitt, 209 A.D.2d 341, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 865). The danger of fading memories or unavailability of witnesses (albeit police witnesses), the risk of flight by defendant, and the public interest in prompt resolution of the serious charges against this multiple violent felony offender were compelling concerns that justified interference with an established attorney-client relationship given the length of the potential delay.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence ( People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). Issues of credibility were properly placed before the jury and we find no reason to disturb its findings.
Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Williams, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.