Opinion
December 8, 1997
Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Tisch, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record indicates that he understood the proceedings against him and that he was able to assist in his defense. Moreover, two psychiatrists found him competent to stand trial. Accordingly, we find that the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by determining that he was competent to stand trial (see, People v. Rowley, 222 A.D.2d 718; People v. Picozzi, 106 A.D.2d 413). Moreover, the court properly permitted the defendant to continue pro se, since a defendant who is competent to stand trial is necessarily competent to waive his right to counsel (see, People v. McIntyre, 36 N.Y.2d 10; People v. Schoolfield, 196 A.D.2d 111).
The court was within its discretion to deny the defendant's request for public funds to obtain a hypnotism expert (see, People v. Hughes, 59 N.Y.2d 523; People v. Cronin, 60 N.Y.2d 430; People v. Carpenter, 240 A.D.2d 863).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit (see, People v. Galloway, 54 N.Y.2d 396).
Mangano, P.J., Copertino, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.