Opinion
June 9, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Heller, J.).
Judgment, as amended, affirmed.
On appeal, the defendant contends that the hearing court erred in denying the branch of his motion which was to suppress statements because they were not made voluntarily. Contrary to the defendant's claim, the hearing court's determination that the defendant's statements were made voluntarily and spontaneously and without any physical or psychological coercion was supported by the record (see, People v. Rivers, 56 N.Y.2d 476; People v Anderson, 42 N.Y.2d 35).
The defendant, who acted as his own attorney during the proceedings, further contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel at his suppression hearing due to the court's denial of his request to have his legal advisor question him during his direct examination, and at the hearing on his motion to set aside the sentence when the court appointed a Legal Aid attorney to represent him without his consent. The defendant's claim is without merit. It is established that where a defendant decides to represent himself, he has no constitutional right to be simultaneously advised or represented by appointed standby counsel (see, People v. Sawyer, 57 N.Y.2d 12, 22, cert denied 459 U.S. 1178; People v. Mirenda, 57 N.Y.2d 261, 265-267; People v. Hazen, 94 A.D.2d 905, 907). Thus, the hearing court's denial of the defendant's request that his legal adviser question him did not deprive him of any constitutionally protected right. Furthermore, the court properly appointed a Legal Aid attorney to represent the defendant at the hearing to set aside the sentence, since the record indicates that the defendant refused to comply with the court's directive to confine his arguments to the motion to set aside the sentence (see, People v. Glover, 90 A.D.2d 776). In any event, the defendant has not suffered any prejudice due to the court's ruling, since the motion was granted.
Finally, the defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the sentence of 8 1/3 to 25 years, which was imposed after the original sentence of 10 to 20 years was vacated on the ground of illegality, was legal and appropriate (see, People v Wright, 80 A.D.2d 624, affd 56 N.Y.2d 613; People v. Gillette, 33 A.D.2d 587). We have considered the defendant's other claims and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.