PEOPLE v. CHARNOCK III (1997)

 Defendant, while represented by counsel, negotiated a bargained plea to a reduced charge of attempted robbery in the first degree in full satisfaction of the indictment.   There is nothing in the record to indicate that defense counsel had any difficulty communicating with defendant or that defendant was incapable of assisting in his own defense, nor is there any indication that defendant engaged in bizarre behavior.   Thus, there is no merit to defendant's contention that County Court should have, sua sponte, ordered a competency examination (see, CPL 730.10[2];  People v. Ross, 185 A.D.2d 661, 586 N.Y.S.2d 75, lv. denied 80 N.Y.2d 934, 589 N.Y.S.2d 861, 603 N.E.2d 966).   The court did not err in proceeding to impose sentence without conducting further inquiry to determine whether defendant had knowingly waived the potential defense of intoxication.   During the plea colloquy, defendant freely admitted the facts surrounding the robbery of the elderly couple in their home, including the nature of his involvement and the involvement of his codefendant, and never indicated to the court that he did not know what he was doing.

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: