From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Valvano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 19, 1992
186 A.D.2d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

October 19, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dufficy, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the plea is vacated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings consistent herewith, including a hearing to determine the defendant's competency.

The court initially found that the defendant was not fit to proceed and did not at any time thereafter determine that the defendant was not an incapacitated person (see, CPL 730.30). Under these circumstances, since a defendant may not waive his competency to proceed in a criminal action (see, People v Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1, 9), it was error for the court to allow the defendant to enter a plea of guilty.

There is, however, no merit to the defendant's contention that the indictment should be dismissed because the prosecutor deprived him of an uninterrupted opportunity to furnish the Grand Jury with his version of the matters being investigated. Indeed, the occasional interruptions by the prosecutor were warranted in view of the defendant's failure to confine his testimony to the subject of the Grand Jury inquiry (see, CPL 190.50 [b]). Bracken, J.P., Harwood, Miller and Copertino, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Valvano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 19, 1992
186 A.D.2d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Valvano

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. RALPH VALVANO…

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

Date published: Oct 19, 1992

Citations

186 A.D.2d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
589 N.Y.S.2d 69

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

The minutes of the Grand Jury proceedings demonstrate that the prosecutor interrupted the defendant on two…

People v. Dunn

) Even evidence that would undoubtedly be admissible at a trial on the same charges may be precluded if that…