Opinion
2014-07-3
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Juan CASTRO, Defendant–Appellant.
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Sherry A. Chase of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Nicholas T. Texido of Counsel), for Respondent.
The Legal Aid Bureau of Buffalo, Inc., Buffalo (Sherry A. Chase of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney, Buffalo (Nicholas T. Texido of Counsel), for Respondent.
PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., PERADOTTO, SCONIERS, WHALEN, and DeJOSEPH, JJ.
MEMORANDUM:
On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of, inter alia, murder in the second degree (Penal Law § 125.25[1] ), defendant contends that Supreme Court erred in failing to follow the requirements of CPL article 730 to determine whether he was competent to stand trial at the time his case was presented to the grand jury ( seeCPL 730.30[1] ). We reject that contention. The record establishes that the court granted defense counsel's request for a “forensic examination” of defendant by ordering only an informal psychological examination and not by issuing an order of examination pursuant to CPL article 730. We conclude that “[t]he decision of the court to order an informal psychological examination was within its discretion ... and ‘did not automatically require the court to issue an order of examination or otherwise comply with CPL article 730’ ” ( People v. Brown, 277 A.D.2d 972, 972, 716 N.Y.S.2d 540,lv. denied96 N.Y.2d 732, 722 N.Y.S.2d 799, 745 N.E.2d 1022;see People v. Johnson, 252 A.D.2d 967, 968, 676 N.Y.S.2d 366,affd.92 N.Y.2d 976, 683 N.Y.S.2d 754, 706 N.E.2d 742;People v. Ortiz, 46 A.D.3d 1409, 1409, 848 N.Y.S.2d 474,lv. denied10 N.Y.3d 769, 854 N.Y.S.2d 331, 883 N.E.2d 1266). We further conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.