Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Jonathan McNITT, Defendant–Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05 [former (3) ] ), resisting arrest (§ 205.30), and disorderly conduct (§ 240.20[3] ). Contrary to defendant's contention, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his request for new counsel (see generally People v. Rolfe, 83 A.D.3d 1219, 1220, 920 N.Y.S.2d 856, lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 809, 929 N.Y.S.2d 569, 953 N.E.2d 807). The record establishes that the court made a sufficient inquiry and determined that there was no good cause for substitution (see generally People v. Linares, 2 N.Y.3d 507, 510–511, 780 N.Y.S.2d 529, 813 N.E.2d 609). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the court erred in admitting in evidence testimony regarding an uncharged crime (see People v. Thomas, 85 A.D.3d 1572, 1572, 925 N.Y.S.2d 287; People v. Kelly, 71 A.D.3d 1520, 1520, 897 N.Y.S.2d 353, lv. denied 15 N.Y.3d 775, 907 N.Y.S.2d 464, 933 N.E.2d 1057). In any event, his contention is without merit inasmuch as the testimony was relevant to establish defendant's motive and to provide relevant background information (see Thomas, 85 A.D.3d at 1572, 925 N.Y.S.2d 287; People v. Monzon, 289 A.D.2d 595, 735 N.Y.S.2d 810, lv. denied 98 N.Y.2d 712, 749 N.Y.S.2d 9, 778 N.E.2d 560). By failing to object to his appearance in prison garb at trial, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that he was thereby denied a fair trial (see People v. Walker, 259 A.D.2d 1026, 1027, 688 N.Y.S.2d 326, lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 1029, 697 N.Y.S.2d 588, 719 N.E.2d 949), and we decline to exercise our power to review that contention as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see CPL 470.15[6][a] ). Finally, upon our review of the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of this case, viewed in totality and as of the time of the representation, we reject defendant's contention that he received ineffective assistance of counsel (see generally People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: June 15, 2012
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)