From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ramsey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 4, 1994
201 A.D.2d 915 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

February 4, 1994

Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Connell, J.

Present — Pine, J.P., Fallon, Doerr, Davis and Boehm, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to defendant's contention that the court abused its discretion in denying defendant's request for an adjournment in order to permit defendant to prepare for self-representation at the trial (see, People v. Arroyave, 49 N.Y.2d 264, 271; People v. McIntyre, 36 N.Y.2d 10, 17). Furthermore, the record shows that, after the court denied defendant's request for an adjournment, defendant abandoned his application for leave to proceed pro se and consented to be represented by his previously assigned counsel at the trial (see, People v. Grippo, 124 A.D.2d 985, 986).

Contrary to defendant's argument, the court did not err in admitting the so-called shank into evidence. In any event, in light of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt, the error, if any, is harmless (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242).


Summaries of

People v. Ramsey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Feb 4, 1994
201 A.D.2d 915 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

People v. Ramsey

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MICHAEL RAMSEY…

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

Date published: Feb 4, 1994

Citations

201 A.D.2d 915 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
610 N.Y.S.2d 902

Citing Cases

People v. Smith [4th Dept 2001

"[E]vidence of a victim's prior complaint of a sex crime does not come within the proscriptive scope of CPL…

People v. Couser

equivocally, an openness to proceeding with a new attorney from a different area ( People v. White , 114…