From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ferguson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 30, 1998
248 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

March 30, 1998

Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Belfi, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The court properly determined, after a hearing, that the defendant was competent to stand trial ( see, CPL 730.10). The People sustained their burden of establishing the defendant's fitness through the expert testimony of two psychiatrists ( see, People v. Pulecio, 237 A.D.2d 633; People v. Vandemark, 225 A.D.2d 716, 717; People v. Supino, 202 A.D.2d 454; People v. Orama, 150 A.D.2d 505, 506; People v. Allen, 135 A.D.2d 823; People v. Breeden, 115 A.D.2d 484).

Contrary to the defendant's contentions, neither the fact that the defense-retained psychiatrist disagreed with the conclusion of the two court-appointed experts, nor the fact that the defendant opted to reject a "black rage" insanity defense dictated a ruling that he was unfit for trial. As this Court has previously observed, "[w]here the hearing court is presented with conflicting evidence of competency, great deference [is] accorded its findings" ( People v. Gordon, 125 A.D.2d 587, 588; People v. Allen, supra, at 823; People v. Breeden, supra, at 484). In addition, the defendant's decision not to pursue an insanity defense does not, in and of itself, indicate incompetence ( see, People v. Reason, 37 N.Y.2d 351, 352-353; People v. Dyer, 128 A.D.2d 719, 720; People v. Morton, 173 A.D.2d 1081, 1084; People v. Allen, supra, at 823; People v. Picozzi, 106 A.D.2d 413, 414).

The court properly permitted the defendant to appear pro se, since a defendant who is competent to stand trial is necessarily competent to waive his right to counsel and proceed pro se (see, People v. Reason, supra, at 353-354; People v. Schoolfield, 196 A.D.2d 111, 116).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

Miller, J. P., Thompson, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Ferguson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 30, 1998
248 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

People v. Ferguson

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. COLIN FERGUSON…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 30, 1998

Citations

248 A.D.2d 725 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
670 N.Y.S.2d 327

Citing Cases

People v. Garrasi

Contrary to the contention of defendant, Supreme Court's determination that he was fit to proceed is…

People v. Troy

The burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish a defendant's competence, and the burden requires that…