From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Kenney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 18, 1996
225 A.D.2d 707 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

March 18, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We reject the defendant's contention that the Supreme Court was statutorily required to conduct a competency hearing after the defendant was found fit to proceed pursuant to CPL 730.60 (2) (see, People v Gensler, 72 N.Y.2d 239, cert denied 488 U.S. 932). In addition, the Supreme Court did not err by failing to conduct a hearing sua sponte (see, People v Gensler, supra). There is no evidence in the record that the defendant lacked the capacity to understand the proceedings against him and to assist in his own defense (see, CPL 730.10). Moreover, the defendant's plea of guilty was knowingly and voluntarily entered (see, People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9). Miller, J.P., Joy, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Kenney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 18, 1996
225 A.D.2d 707 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Kenney

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JAMES KENNEY, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 18, 1996

Citations

225 A.D.2d 707 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
639 N.Y.S.2d 940

Citing Cases

People v. Pendleton

Here, defense counsel initially sought a CPL 730.30(2) hearing, but subsequently withdrew the motion. Under…

People v. Pendleton

Under these circumstances, the County Court was not statutorily required to conduct a competency hearing (see…